Now this is what I call true Witnessing to other, about Jesus. A simple conversation with simple and straight answers. Gracefully bow out and give blessing. Now let God do his miracle with His Grace.
@childofgod4913 open your eyes and heart to the Truth of God's Holy Word the Bible starting with Genesis all the way to Revelation ask the Holy Spirit to give you understanding of what you are reading I ask this in Jesus name Amen 🙏 I will be praying you will God bless you Friend
@@johnnemeth825 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:8-9 KJV) keep praying for revelation God isn’t a trinity nor is he a person God is spirit read your Bible
2:00 @AskDrBrown get someone on staff to get the link from the ad and you can stop up to 500 advertisers currently from running on your channel in your ad sense account. I ask people to send me inappropriate ads and then block them. You can do similar. 👍
Speaking of inappropriate ads popping up on Christian teaching channels; I was watching one the other day, and an ad popped up for some kind of canned vodka drink. Not that the ad in itself was offensive, but it was rather inappropriate to the audience the video was targeted to. I guess it just goes to show that the world, the flesh, and the devil never sleeps -- open for business 24-7. Just as an aside, when I was younger, I was well on the way to alcoholism, which runs in my family. My mom used to put beer in my baby bottle 🍼 to get me to shut up. Nevertheless, I didn't become a big fan of alcohol till I was about twenty (drinking age was 18, but I had been going into bars since I was 16), however, some fairly short time after I was saved, I actually became extremely allergic to beer -- like anaphylactic shock after a few sips! I had never been allergic to anything before that time, so I didn't realize that was what was going on. To show you how young and stupid I was, it took about seven or eight seriously near death experiences (with never any medical treatment) before I grasped the concept that I should NOT have even a social beer with my buddies. I can still drink distilled alcohol, but even a tiny bit, like a tenth of an ounce -- makes me feel terrible, not a reaction, just I can feel it in my system -- very unpleasant -- I can hardly believe I used to enjoy that feeling! A few years later when I took first responder training and advanced first aid and learned what anaphylaxis was; I realized just how lucky I had been. I truly believe that if the Lord Jesus had not wanted me alive for some reason, I would have died, because at least one of first instances -- I was deep in the woods in a place my friend and I had to get to on our dirt bikes. A place NOT easy to reach even on foot, and impossible for an ambulance or even a car. This was in the late seventies and there were no cell phones or GPS. No way to call for help, no way to tell anyone where we were, and no way to give directions to us either. We knew how to get back out, but could not have told anyone where we were. Anyway, after a couple of hours I was well enough to ride home, but it took several other experiences before I figured out that I really shouldn't have beer! I still don't know what is in the stuff that causes me to react like that, but apparently beer allergies are not uncommon. God works in mysterious ways indeed! 🙏✝️🙏
Here YWHW is talking! Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. Isaiah 48:16
God is one and we all agree. The problem happens when we begin to create complex doctrines based on a psychoanalysis of God. It’s beyond any of us to actually know this which is why the scripture never tries to explain it. God is one period. Accept it and don’t be tempted to explain the unknowable. Paul says “great is the mystery”… yet we think it’s not. We could bring a rabbi, a Christian proponent of the trinity, and a Christian proponent for the oneness to a debate and they’d all be able with scripture to convince a certain amount of people of their point. It’s complicated and beyond any of us knowing with any certainty. Also, just pointing out that Revelation says there’s 7 spirits. There’s a reason the scripture Time and time again reminds us God is one and that’s because he knows the temptation of man to explain what we don’t actually know and seeing stories and statement from scripture tempts us to explain. No criticism of others just the way I see things.
Your thinking is a little dangerous because doctrine is very important. We have to strive to believe in the right doctrine. Going by your standards, Mormons and Jehovah's witnesses are also saved.
Muslims say that in the quran, as you said, Dr. Brown: the king says WE, although he thinks only of himself... But Muslims always say that do not add anyone to Allah, but Allah adds others to himself and shares his glory with everyone because he says for himself: WE...
The evidence which is rock solid for the presense in the Old Testament is something Godvgave me 7 Years ago. In KjV most of the Ot verses except the first verse start with AND. ! Even after a full stop !!! It’s is the same in the Jewish Bible. The verses after first verse start with VAV. Means nail. Who has nail ? Yeshua. And is a connecting word in Hebrew also. It connects things right? Jesus is the connection between you and God !
So in Genesis ch 18, it was God(Jesus) and two Angels as if you read verses 21-22 the Men Abraham saw as the Lord went to Sodom but Abraham still stood before the Lord and if you read Genesis ch 19 vs 1, you’ll see that it was two Angels that’s arrived at sodom. Then reading verse 24, the Lord rained down fire and brimstone upon sodom and gomorrah from the Lord out of heaven. That’s very clear that God was on earth and God was in heaven. Verse 27 made it clearer.
The Trinity in the Old Testament (NASB). Hebrew added to NASB verses from Strong 's Concordance in ( ). Notice the spelling, Lord GOD and LORD God. (KJV,NASB,ESV). Isaiah 48 16 Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord GOD(אֲדֹנָי ’ăḏônây) ,(יְהוִֹה yhwh) has sent Me, and His Spirit(רוּחַ rûaḥ).” 17 Thus says the LORD(יְהוָֹה yhwh), your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, “I am the LORD your God,(יְהוָֹה yhwh) (אֱלֹהִים ’elôhîym), who teaches you to profit, Who leads you in the way you should go. ONE GOD, THREE persons. 1- Lord(אֲדֹנָי ’ăḏônây) GOD(יְהוִֹה yhwh) has sent Me, and His Spirit(רוּחַ rûaḥ). This is the Father which no man has ever seen. 2- LORD(יְהוָֹה yhwh) your God(אֱלֹהִים ’elôhîym). The Son. the Redeemer, and creator incarnated as Jesus. 3- His Spirit(רוּחַ rûaḥ). Gen. 1:1, In the beginning God (אֱלֹהִים ’elôhîym) created the heavens and the earth. Ezek. 28:12, Son of man ... ‘This is what the Lord GOD (אֲדֹנָי ’ăḏônây) ,(יְהוִֹה yhwh) says .....
Ia there a clear distinction between God the father and the Holy Spirit in the Hebrew description. I ask as it sounds plausible that God the father could be described as the Holy Spirit. Any help on this would be great.
Hosea confirms that it was an angel (Hosea 12:4). When the text says he wrestled with “elohim” it could mean god-like ones (e.g. Psalm 82:6), in the same sense that when Judah is called a lion, it means a lion-like one. Or the angel could actually be called God since it went in the name of God as God’s messenger. And this is like in Isaiah 7:10 where when Isaiah speaks to Ahaz, the text says “and YHVH spoke to Ahaz.”
@@nb3500 read Hosea:12:4-6. Also the Son of God is the Lord of hosts all through the Old Testament, for truly I say to you, no one has ever seen the Father, yet so many “seen God” and oh they did see God my friend, The Son of God.
@@AndrewFisherOfMen Am I missing something in verses 5-6? And when the text says that someone “saw God (“elohim” or the shortened form “el”), like before those words can easily be understood as they saw a god-like being. Moreover, it’s not sensible that someone can be said to see God, but not see the Father, since those words are synonymous and cannot be separated when referring to the one, true God. There is no “God the Father” in the sense of that’s only one person in a set. But rather it’s “God *comma* the Father”, as in Malachi, “Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us?” (Malachi 2:10) The term “Father” is simply used for God in recognition of His role of Creator, and that’s why it can’t be separated from his title as God.
Have you asked Jesus and the Holy Spirit if the Eucharist is truly the Lord's body and blood as the Church (Catholic and Orthodox) has taught for 2000 years? I understand that you have reasoned your symbolic understanding because you say on Holy Thursday at the Seder meal that the bread and wine could not be His body and blood because He had not died on the cross yet. But are not all things possible with God? And why didn't Jesus point out to those Jews who were horrified in John 6 that they shouldn't fear being cannibalistic since He was only speaking symbolically. He just let them go away being horrified when He could have easily have explained this? I don't think so. Especially since He asked His own disciples if they were going to leave as well. Anyway, I'm a Catholic and I praise God that He gives Himself so intimately to us in the Holy Eucharist. I thank you and bless you for your ministry and your devotion to our Lord. I pray that you continue to lead so many to the Father. I am just sorry that so many of my Christian brothers and sisters are deprived of the true Eucharist, an incomprehensible miracle that sanctifies us.
@@eekimi9692 Thank you for taking the time to write to me, but I have a question for you. What did Jesus mean when at the Passover Seder when He took the bread and said, "THIS IS MY BODY," and then when He took the chalice of wine, He said, "THIS IS MY BLOOD." He did not say the bread was a symbol of His body not did He say the wine was a symbol of His blood. Sorry, all the early fathers of the Church like Justin Martyr were very clear about the bread and wine actually becoming the body and blood of the Lord. Google on the writings of the early Church fathers. Don't take my word for it. Do you really think God, as you noted above who clued in Noah on clean and unclean animals left the Church without the Holy Spirit for 1500 years until the Protestant reformers came along? Why do the Orthodox proclaim that the Eucharist is the body and blood of our Lord. Except for Protestants, this is and has been the teaching of the Church from the beginning. God bless you and open your eyes to the truth.
Jesus still in body , next to the Father, how can his corpse be eaten and his blood drunk, when blood is prohibited for consumption?? Don’t work for the food that perish, so the wafers don’t end in the sewerage system??
Is the Trinity in the Old Testament? ============================= " But many doctrines are accepted by evangelicals as being clearly taught in the scripture for which there are NO proof texts. The doctrine of the Trinity furnishes the best example of this. It is fair to say that the Bible does NOT clearly teach the doctrine of the trinity. In fact, there is NOT ONE proof text...." -Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Trinitarian, Professor, Dallas Theological Seminary, "Basic Theology", pg89 "The distinction between the one "ousia" (essence) and the three "hypostaseis" (substances) represents NOTHING in either the Old Testament or the New Testament. When the Western Church used "substantia" instead of "essentia" for "ousia", and "persona" instead of "substantia" for "hypostasis", and when the "personae" even came to be thought of as three distinct persons in something, like our common sense of the word, theology went even FARTHER AFIELD FROM the straight path of Biblical Monotheism." -Professor M. Burrows, Yale Divinity School, An Outline of Biblical Theology, pg 81 "Today Scholars generally AGREE that there is NO doctrine of the Trinity as such in either the O.T. or the N.T.. It would go far BEYOND the intention and thought-forms of the O.T. to suppose that a late fourth-century or thirteenth-century Christian doctrine can be found there. Likewise, the N.T. does NOT contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity." -Encyclopedia of Catholicism, pgs564-565 "The doctrine (Trinity) is NOT found in it's fully developed form in the scriptures. Modern Theology does NOT seek to find it in the O.T.. At the time of the Reformation the Protestant Church took over the doctrine of the Trinity WITHOUT serious examination." -New International Encyclopedia, vol23, pg477 "....it (Trinity) is NOT taught clearly or explicitly taught ANYWHERE in the Scripture....There really is NO explicit statement of the doctrine of the Trinity in the Bible,....It is UNLIKELY that ANY TEXT of Scripture can be shown to teach the doctrine of the Trinity in a clear, direct, and unmistakable fashion." -God in Three Persons, M.J. Erickson, Research Professor of Theology, S.W. Baptist Theological Seminary "The Doctrine of the Trinity itself, however, is NOT a Biblical doctrine…. The ecclesiastical doctrine of the Trinity is the product of philosophical speculation which is REMOTE from the thought of the Bible" -Emil Brunner, 1949, Westminister Press, "The Christian Doctrine of God" "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew Scriptures: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4)." -Ref: Encyclopedia Brittanica "The explicit doctrine (Trinity) was thus formulated in the POST-BIBLICAL period. Attempts to trace the origins still earlier to the O.T. literature CANNOT be supported by historical-critical scholarship. The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great Church Councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is NOT TO BE FOUND in the N.T." -Harper-Collins Bible Dictionary, pgs1052-1053
Commenting on minute 36 (wiping the animals or people: the Lord Jesus never wiped anything or anyone. The wip was used to make a sound on the ground that made the animals start moving. So the wip was a moving mechanism to direct such a huge number of animals to out of the temple. This could have been the only loud sound animals would understand and react to. So as the Lord Jesus wipped the ground, the animals (many) would start moving away from the sound and eventually drove them all out of the temple.
@ASKDrBrown dear brother, since you are fluent in Hebrew, can you please explain what is the baptism of fire John the Baptist mentioned that Jesus would be baptizing (Matthew 3:11)? Is it related to what Jesus has mentioned in Mark 10:38-40
“His winnowing shovel is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn. But the chaff he will burn with fire that never goes out.”” Matthew 3:12 CSB The verse afterwards indicates that fire is the judgement This in no way takes away from the fiery nature of The Holy Spirit but the fire mentioned is not talking about Him “Look, the Lord will come with fire - his chariots are like the whirlwind - to execute his anger with fury and his rebuke with flames of fire.” Isaiah 66:15 CSB Hope this helps
Here is my understanding of the trinity. Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong: In the trinitarian conception, the word "God" is a collective noun like the words "human" and "cattle." There’s only one "human" species and one "cattle" species, but many instances (examples) of each. Each individual person is a human, but is distinct from every other human, which doesn't mean that there are many human. Similarly, there are many cows in the world, but each is a cattle. So, there is one class of beings called "God", but 3 distinct instances of beings belonging to the God class. In Christian theology, these are "the Father", "the Son" and the "Holy Spirit". So, there are not 3 Gods, but one God with distinct instances just like there is one, not a billion, human species with about 8 billion instances (examples) of people, each one of which is a human. Like people have different roles and entitlements, so the 3 instances of God. The highest form of religious worship (as in prayer) only belongs to Father. However, we pray to HIM in the name of the SON (Jesus) who is an intermediary between us and HIM. The Father grants our requests (the subject of our prayer) through the agency of the HOLY SPIRIT, so each member of the "God family" has HIS role in regard to the rest of the cosmos including us human beings. Other than the highest form religious worship (prayer), due to the Father only, all 3 "God beings" or instances of "God" can receive other forms of worship (reverence, praise, gratitude, obeisance, obedience, adulation, etc.) from us. In fact, the Bible allows us to give some of these to humans as well. E.g. , children are instructed to obey their parents, wives are admonished to submit to their husbands and all Christians are to obey all governmental/constituted authorities as long as they do not conflict with their attributing the highest form of Relgious worship to the Father. So, for example, a Christian can not pray to a president or emperor and should not obey any government law that forbids him from praying to God or obeying God's command to "gather in worship with other believers", i.e., to attend church and other Christian fellowships. A Christian should be ready to pay the price of death if necessary in that circumstance. I think there's no difficulty understanding the trinity in this way nor any logical inconsistency.
In the Garden of Gethsame, Jesus is praying. Luke 22:42 42 “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.” Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? On the cross: Matt 27:46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”). Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? Luke 23:34 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? Luke 23:46 Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit”; Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? Father, Son and Spirit. >> if Jesus was Lord why he did not revealed Verses like John 10:30 I amd Father are 1 in old Testament ? Why He did not order to Worship him? In New Testament Jesus said God to Father 165 times but why He did not even say 1 time God to Himself?
@@mitchellosmer1293 Yes. My understanding is that the Office of the Father is greater than that of the Son, but the two are "equal in nature", i.e., are both spirits, uncreated, eternal, deity, etc.
@@mathewsamuel1386 In the Garden of Gethsame, Jesus is praying. Luke 22:42 42 “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.” Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? On the cross: Matt 27:46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”). Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? Luke 23:34 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? Luke 23:46 Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit”; Who is Jesus talking to? Himself?? If he spirit is that of God, then Jesus lied!!! Father, Son and Spirit. >> if Jesus was Lord why he did not revealed Verses like John 10:30 I amd Father are 1 in old Testament ? Why He did not order to Worship him? In New Testament Jesus said God to Father 165 times but why He did not even say 1 time God to Himself?
“The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306). “There is in the Old Testament no indication of distinctions in the Godhead; it is an anachronism to find either the doctrine of the Incarnation or that of the Trinity in its pages” (“God,”Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. 6, p. 254). “Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity” (The Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. Mircea Eliade, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987, Vol. 15, p. 54). “The Old Testament tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit…. There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead…. Even to see in the Old Testament suggestions or foreshadowings or ‘veiled signs’ of the Trinity of persons, is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers” (Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God, Baker Book House, 1972, pp. xv, 8, 9).
Brown you are a shame for our people, there is nothing in the Old Testament that confirms the fact that God is triune. The story of the "two powers" was used by Philo who was a heretic, it doesn't matter that he was one of us (a son of Israel) if a Jew was a heretic, his thought cannot be used to identify Jewish thought biblical, because the biblical Hebrew thought is transmitted by the Bible (Old and New Testament) the rest is not the Word of God, so it cannot be used to interpret what is written in the Bible, this is a very serious matter. Philo was influenced by Plato's thought (and other philosophers), he even went so far as to define the logos as "second god" and this shows that he was a heretic. And his heresies have influenced some false Christians such as Origen who also spoke of a "second god" (Contra Celsum 5,39). It was Philo who claimed that the Angel of YHWH was the logos, because for him, influenced by philosophy, he considered God as transcendent and therefore he did not manifest himself at his creation but the logos did, since for Philo the Logos was the mediator between God and his creation (and the logos of Philo was not that of the New Testament), and this is very similar to what the heretic Justin martyr said, and to what you Trinitarians of today say, who see the Son and not the Father in the manifestations of God described in the Old Testament. But this is not what the Bible teaches in Shemot 3: 6 the Angel of YHWH said: ויאמר אנכי אלהי אביך אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב However, he was a manifestation of God and not another "person" (the same is true for the manifestation of God in Genesis 18). The concept of multiple persons in God does not come from the Bible and our fathers would probably have seen it for what it is, that is, polytheism. You polytheists are no different from the polytheistic he-re-tic Tertullian (who later believed the false prophet Montano, so it should be clear what kind of character we are talking about) from what he said commenting on Genesis 1:26. The Jew Saadia Gaon in his ספר האמונות והדעות (sefer haemunot vehaDeot) said that Genesis 1:26 did not speak of angels, (which is a misinterpretation because that נעשה would imply that the angels would have participated in our creation, and is not so) but said that God used a non-numeral qualitative plural (indicating what some call majesty). What you do not want (and / or probably you cannot) understand is that we do not find this specific use by the Israelite kings because NOBODY dared USE THAT PLURAL EXPRESSION, WHICH GOD (and only HIM) used and which was reported IN THE TORAH (and then again in Isaiah 6 ) although we find something similar said by King David, in 1 Kings 1:33, where David speaks of himself (not in the first person) in the plural אדניכם. Brown, you are serving the false Trinitarian god not the True God of Israel Jesus Christ, the God of the Bible, the God who gave the Torah to our fathers who were at Mount Sinai and manifested himself in the flesh as Jesus Christ. All the ways in which Trinitarians try to find trinity in the Bible are as rid-icu-lous as those of Muslims who think they find mention of their false prophet Muhammad in God's Word. Ri-dicu-lous as those who still try to argue that the trinity comes from Jewish thought using a pseudo-epigraphic text such as the Zohar, which has now been refuted years ago by Gershom Scholem, in fact it is not an ancient text as some believe but was written in Spain in 13th century, and also Yehuda Liebes also argues that it was precisely the doctrine of the trinity that influenced certain statements of the Zohar. The Hebrew terms elohim and echad also do not confirm the doctrine of the trinity. Brown, the God of Israel Jesus Christ is against you
@@albusai As I said in my previous comment to the Tritheist Brown, the מלאך יהוה (Angel of YHWH) was a manifestation of God and not another "person" (a concept absent in biblical Hebrew thought). The Angel of YHWH spoke in the first person to Moshe saying "I (אנכי) am the God of your father, the God of Avraham, the God of Yitzhak, and the God of Ya'akov" (Shemot 3:6). And the verse continues in a way that shows that Moshe had really understood that the Angel of YHWH was YHWH, in fact it says “And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God (haelohim). And this is also evident from Devarim 33:16 where it is written: "... the favor of him who dwells in the bush. So it was God who spoke to Moshe from the burning bush. My fathers (the ancient Israelites) knew that the Angel of YHWH was YHWH himself, this teaches the Old Testament. The problem arose later, especially with that heretic of my people, Philo of Alexandria, who taught that the Angel of the Lord was the logos (De Somniis 1,228-239 ; De cherubim 1-3) and for Philo the logos it was distinct from God but however divine (in fact as I have already said he also called it second god) but this is not what the Tanakh teaches, in which, it is never said that the Angel of YHWH was the Word of God. The Trinity it is a satanic doctrine developed by men, it has nothing to do with biblical Jewish thought. *Jesus Christ is the God of Israel YHWH*
@@-charutz6732 We Christians do not believe that there are three Gods but we believe that there is one God, but in this one God three persons coexist, they are indivisible and have the same essence. I quote to you Israelite signs from the Old Testament to distinguish the Holy Triune God: •Gen. 1.26. •Gen. 3.22. •Gen. 11.7. • Is. 6.3. • Is. 6.1 • Gen. 18, 1 and ex. as the end of the chapter. •Gen. 19,24 • Psal. 32.6 •Soph. G. 16, 12-13 •Soph. G. 18, 15-15: •Soph. G. 9, 1-19 • Psal. 109, 1 • Psal. 2 •Prov. 1:20-33 •Dan. 7.13 • Is. 52.13 • Is. 7.14 •Soph. Series. 24.1 •Soph. Series. 1.1 • Zach. b' 12-15- Hebrew text: b' 8-11). • Psalm. md' 7-8H •Hospitality of Abraham • Is. at 1-10 Psalm 110:3. •Is.48:16
It is supported in other texts. Genesis 11...let us go down even though THE LORD was already down. YHWH takes council about how the king would die. The council is in psalms 82 and 89 and in Job.
I’m still disappointed! Nothing in Genesis 18 says angels. It says clearly three men who are the Lord. Chapter 19 continues with two “messengers” who are still called the Lord in Hebrew all the way to 19:2;18;24. Three who are YHVH in human form. Common Dr. Brown. That is the plain reading of the text. 😉
Yes it does they were 2 angels and God himself in human form. The 2 angels after the meal they ate went to to sodom and Gomorrah as commanded by God. The Lord stayed back answering Abrahams questions.
@@shio_sakaki_the_legend392 No, chapter 18 does not say two “angels”. Please read the chapter and look at the Hebrew. Three men appeared as YHVH. That is the plain reading of the text.
@@dralgarzaGenesis 18:20- Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.” 22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the Lord.[d] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare[e] the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing-to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” Notice the 2 men went to sodom and God stayed behind with Abraham answering his questions. Next chapter explains who the 2 men were when they got to sodom and met Lot the only righteous person in that area. That they were angels sent by the Lord to destroy sodom and Gomorrah. The Lords used in 19:2 is 'lords' with a small 'l' which indicates its not speaking about Yahweh. Even abraham was called lord by his wife, it does not mean he's Yahweh all of a sudden. Chapter 19 starts of by telling you that the 2 men are angels.
@@shio_sakaki_the_legend392 Again, please refer to the Hebrew which calls all three who appeared "Adonai" regardless if they were "messengers." Lot called the two "Adonai" twice and Moses refers to all three YHVH in Genesis 19:24. The Hebrew is clear. Your 19:2 is Adonai in Hebrew and not "lords" or Adoni. Your English is wrong. And in verse 19:18 it is Adonai too. So please read from the Hebrew.
@@dralgarza nothing you said made sense, the entire 19 chapter the 2 men are referred to as angels and God is referred to as 'Lord' big 'L' meaning Yahweh. Small 'lord' Adonai ( אֲדֹנָי, lit. "My Lords") is the plural form of adon ("Lord") along with the first-person singular pronoun enclitic. ... The singular forms adon and adoni ("my lord") are used in the Hebrew Bible as royal titles, as in the First Book of Samuel, and for distinguished persons. Again adonai has been used as titles for alot of important people in the old testament. It does not mean that they are Yahweh 'Lord' very big difference. Genesis 19:12-The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here-sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.” 14 So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were pledged to marry[a] his daughters. He said, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the Lord is about to destroy the city!” But his sons-in-law thought he was joking. Notice the angels recognize and address God as Yahweh 'Lord' and not themselves. The point is that God has sent his angles to do his work that he himself is overseeing. The same way an angel appeared to Moses in the bushes and spoke as God because that is what he was sent to do but made clear he is not God but only a messenger. Back to your word Adonai, One of the most prominent names used for God in the Old Testament is the name Adonai. Adonai is a Hebrew word that translates as "Lord" of "Lord Master" from its derivation "sovereignty". People throughout the Old Testament used the word Adonai when addressing humans who were master or lord over them. Do learn the difference because saying all 3 men were God makes no sense because alot of verses in the same chapter refute your claim. Ps. Chapter 18 starts with the 'Lord' big L referring to Yahweh appearing to abraham very clear, then Abraham addresses them as masters or adonai in general. Then chapter 19 reveals who the other 2 men are. Very simple.
I agree. Genesis 18 says 3 men, and 1 is YHVH. 2 of the men go to Sodom, and 1 (called YHVH) stays back and has a conversation with Abraham. In Genesis 19:24 it say " Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the Lord out of the heavens". If the 3 "men" are all YHVH, who's the 4th YHVH then that is in the Heavens raining down fire and brimstone while the YHVH who talked to Abraham initiated it? It's the WORD of YHVH (aka the Son, the Presence, The Angel of YHVH, the Logos) in flesh form with 2 angels, imo. Like the Ark of the covenant; 2 cherubim and the Presence/Angel/Glory of YHVH in between them. bless you all.
@@poorchristopher15 I agree (as my original post says), 2 of the men are angels, 1 is the LORD who Abraham spoke with and he asked if Sodom could be spared.. the start of Genesis 19 makes it pretty clear. Some people think the '3 men' are all YHWH in Gen 18 ; I disagree with that assertion. 1 was the LORD, the 2 that left earlier for Sodom were angels as Gen 19 shows. Genesis 19:24 "Then *the Lord* rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from *the Lord* out of the heavens. ".. It literally says Lord twice. My point was, if the 3 men in Gen 18 are all YHWH, then Gen 19:24 introduces a 4th YHWH figure which makes no sense.
@@johnscott7937I would rethink your interpretation of Genesis 19:24. The text doesn’t seem like it’s saying that there are two YHVHs but simply saying who rained down the fire and brimstone (God) and who they came from (also God). We find a similar literary occurrence in 1 Kings 8:1: “Then *Solomon* assembled the elders of Israel, and all the heads of the tribes, the chief of the fathers of the children of Israel, *unto king Solomon* in Jerusalem…”. Hope this helps.
Great material on the Trinity foreshadowed in the Tanakh. On the real presence in the Eucharist, however, Dr. Brown would do well to read the early church fathers on the matter (they were much closer to the time of the original revelations than we are today) as well as the TH-cam presentations of EUCHARISTIC MIRACLE and take these under consideration in the formation of his position on the matter of the real presence.
Communion How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47) When the crowd took offense at his gruesome talk, Jesus exposed their unbelief: “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:63-64). don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [63] It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL. -John 6:35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.--unquote Obviously you have NO understanding of that verse!!!! READ IT AGAIN!!! "he who comes to Me will not hunger"- his body "he who believes in Me will never thirst.-"--His blood!!! Whomever FOLLOWS Jesus will NOT hunger--due to His words!!! Whomever BELIEVES in Jesus will NOT THIRST--due to His words!!! >>>>th-cam.com/video/cmVWzhM8Bbk/w-d-xo.html The Atonement: The Strongest Refutation of Rome's Eucharistic Errors >>>>>>> Early church leaders knew nothing of transubstantiation. The eucharist hardly makes any exegetical since to start with. Tradition cannot be the will of God if it goes against the word of God. Jesus uses parallelism in this discourse to equate believing with eating his flesh. Note the parallel between verse 40 and verse 54: (Jn. 6:40) “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” (Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” .>>According to this parallel, beholding and believing (v.40) are equated with eating and drinking Christ’s flesh (v.54). This is further paralleled by verse 35: >>(Jn. 6:35) I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. >>(Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” >>>To “hunger” and “thirst” and parallel to the one who “eats” and “drinks.” But note what Jesus says satisfies our hunger: “He who comes to Me… he who believes in Me.” Jesus isn’t speaking about his literal flesh and blood any more than he is speaking about literal bread (Jn. 6:35) or literal water (Jn. 4:10-14). Indeed, Jesus uses the term sarx for his “body,” rather than the common term sōma (which was the common term used in the Lord’s Supper). Indeed, the “term ‘flesh’ is never used in the NT to refer to the Lord’s Supper.”[4] Hence, this seems “to caution against a sacramental or eucharistic understand of these verses.”[5] This is why Augustine of Hippo wrote regarding this passage: “Believe, and you have eaten.” >>Jesus works in metaphor’s, analogy and hyperbole. In Mark 8 Jesus uses bread language again anhesd calls out those confused thinking he’s being literal not realizing the spiritual message. >>The catholic reasoning system will have little influence on the born again believer who’s truly born of the spirit. Those like my self who exegete and derive revelation from the spirit see the heretical lie of transubstantiation. >>>Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 180) stated that the elements do not lose the nature of bread and wine (Against Heresies, 4.18.4-5; 5.2.2). >>>Tertullian (AD 200) said Jesus’ statement was figurative (Against Marcion, 3.19). >>>Clement of Alexandria (AD 200) called the bread and wine symbols of Jesus’ body (The Instructor, I.6). >>>Origen (AD 250) held his typical allegorical and spiritual view when referring to the elements in the Last Supper. >>>>Eusebius of Caesarea (AD 340) called the elements the body and blood of Christ, but also referred to them as symbolic of spiritual realities (On the Theology of the Church, 3.2.12). >>>Augustine (AD 350) believed that John 6:53 should be understood spiritually and symbolically-not literalistically (On Christian Doctrine 3.16.2). Gelasius I (5th century pope): “The sacrament which we receive of the body and blood of Christ is a divine thing. Wherefore also by means of it we are made partakers of the divine nature. Yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine does not cease to be… Thus, as the elements pass into this, that is, the divine substance by the Holy Ghost, and none the less remain in their own proper nature.”
The Catholic Encyclopedia: “Nowhere in the Old Testament do we find any clear indication of a Third Person.” Catholic theologian Fortman: “The Jews never regarded the spirit as a person; nor is there any solid evidence that any Old Testament writer held this view. . . . The Holy Spirit is usually presented in the Synoptics [Gospels] and in Acts as a divine force or power.” The New Catholic Encyclopedia: “The O[ld] T[estament] clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person . . . God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly.” It also says: “The majority of N[ew] T[estament] texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God.”-Italics ours.
A Catholic Dictionary: “On the whole, the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power.” Hence, neither the Jews nor the early Christians viewed the holy spirit as part of a Trinity. That teaching came centuries later. As A Catholic Dictionary notes: “The third Person was asserted at a Council of Alexandria in 362 . . . and finally by the Council of Constantinople of 381”-some three and a half centuries after holy spirit filled the disciples at Pentecost! No, the holy spirit is not a person and it is not part of a Trinity. The holy spirit is God’s active force that he uses to accomplish his will. It is not equal to God but is always at his disposition and subordinate to him.
The MOST compelling point to me of the evidence that the Holy Spirit absolutely cannot be a separate entity is this: The Bible says the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary. That would make the Holy Spirit Jesus’ father. That would mean God the Father is actually not Jesus’ father. That would make Jesus a liar. And God not the father. And the holy spirit then would take the seat as the Father of the godhead/god family. Which is the position Satan has been vying for…to be father/head of the gods. which puts a very sinister slant on the concept of a Trinity. Who is the entity trying to be acknowledged at a level above God?
@@poorchristopher15The Holy Spirit and Christ are not PART of God, they are God. God is not composite, made up of parts. The 3 persons are each 100% God
We are trying to clarify and define a huge subject in the Vast Universe. Let us remember that we all are just a few pounds of wet dirt - mud-, AND fallen - besides... We are using a straight jacket called "god" which is an ancient, foreign, pagan Persan name. We will NEVER even begin to understand anything, until we admit that... "There is NO "GOD" - anywhere in the Authentic Holy Scriptures ! There is NO Theos, NO Zeus, NO Deus, NO Dios, Puchechamme, (aboriginal Peruvian; imagine having to read: "In the beginning, Puchechamme created the heavens and the earth!) or Burkan (Mongolian) ! Our modern Bible translators, probably ignorantly played to us a major game in translating the UNTRANSLATABLE "ELOHIM")! We have no problem whatsoever with all the HEBREW, ARAMAIC, Babylonian and even Greek names contained inside The Bible, like Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Chedorlaomer, Amrafel, Melchizedek, Maher-Shalal-hash-baz - but hey - when we come to ELOHIM - that is not to be touched, - unusable... Why? THAT is The Most Important Name in The Universe ! ELOHIM created The Entire Universe. - billions of Galaxies, which in term each have billions of stars, ELOHIM created the angels, like seraphims and cherubims, who literally cover their faces in the presence of ELOHIM. But, the modern humans, will not even touch or pronounce The Name of ELOHIM - they substitute The Name of Elohim with PAGAN GODS' NAMES !!! When we fix this worldwide anomaly we might begin getting somewhere. ELOHIM (plural), ELOHE, EL (both singular), used in the New Testament EXCLUSIVELY as ABA, Father are the real names of DIVINITY. Exception: When The Lord Jesus cries out: "Eli, Eli, llamna sabachtani" was still using an OLD Testament term for ELOHIM, but singularized the name because ELOHIM would have meant calling Three Sanctified Names - including HIMSELF ! We need to really go back to square one and study the matter anew - the most important matter in the world ! So there is NO GOD (singular) anywhere, but a single ELOHIM, (plural) in The Universe. When we begin to understand this holy notion, only then we will begin to understand a bit of Divinity...
Since heavens already are created, in OUR likeness might not mean in rhe likeness of 3 persons of the Trinity. Instead - in the image of many Soms of God who ARE ALREADY CREATED. Read books of Dr. Heiser. Nevertheless the very verb of creation is SINGULAR. Therefore - Sons of God DID NOT participate in the creation of man but GOD ONLY.
quote----The part about Christian gentiles not adhering to the Sinai Covenant was very informative. unquote What??? All were Jews Our tradition teaches that when the Torah was given, all Jews were standing at Sinai. Not only all of those who had just exited Egypt, but all Jews who would come into this world in the future were present. Revelation was so important that even Jews who did not yet exist had to witness it directly. ---Quote the Bible about your opinion.
Genesis 1:6-8 [6]And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. [7]And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. [8]And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. These 3 are 1 and in accordance
@Billy HW Here is YWHW is talking! Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. Isaiah 48:16
Lol how These 3 heavens are 1 We pull fresh water from the earth below.. God gives us fresh water from the heavens above And the firmament that we stand on is water... That's y its a "firm"ament.. Wisdom...... Take a look At a map
There's about 14 million Jews today and most non observant...compared to the 3 BILLION people that know the God of Isreal because of his son and messiah, just think about that, does God only want to save 1 / 100000 of people?
Perfect study... except in one point: "There is NO "GOD" - anywhere in the Authentic Holy Scriptures ! There is NO Theos, NO Zeus, NO Deus, NO Dios, Puchechamme, (aboriginal Peruvian) or Burkan (Mongolian) ! Our modern Bible translators, probably ignorantly played to us a major game in translating the UNTRANSLATABLE "ELOHIM")! We have no problem whatsoever with all the HEBREW, ARAMAIC and even Greek names contained inside The Bible, like Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Chedorlaomer, Amrafel, Melchizedek - but hey - when we come to ELOHIM - that is not to be touched, - unusable... Why? THAT is The Most Important Name in The Universe ! ELOHIM created The Entire Universe. - billions of Galaxies, which in term each have billions of stars, ELOHIM created the angels, like seraphims and cherubims, who literally cover their faces in the presence of ELOHIM. But, the modern humans, will not even touch or pronounce The Name of ELOHIM - they substitute The Name of Elohim with PAGAN GODS' NAMES !!! When we fix this worldwide anomaly we might begin getting somewhere. ELOHIM (plural), ELOHE, EL (both singular), used in the New Testament EXCLUSIVELY as ABA, Father are the real names of DIVINITY. Exception: When The Lord Jesus cries out: "Eli, Eli, llamma sabachtani" was still using an OLD Testament term for ELOHIM, but singularized the name because ELOHIM would have meant three sanctified names - including HIMSELF ! We need to really go back to square one and study the matter anew - the most important matter in the world !
@Got it Here is YWHW is talking! Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. Isaiah 48:16
The body and blood are not symbols they're the real body and blood of Christ under the appearance of bread and wine which are symbolic (Jesus being the real bread that sustains us and the true vine) "Unless you eat my body and drink my blood you will not have life within you" hundreds of people had followed Jesus the day after the changing of the fish and two loaves, but when Jesus told them they had to do this everyone of them left him saying this commandment is too much, then Jesus approached Peter on the matter, Peter in faith said where else can I turn, you have the words of eternal life. Jesus preforms this miracle of becoming the true paschal lamb, in the way of Melchizedek the eternal priest who offered bread and wine. If Peter had have left then Jesus ministry would have been over, and then there would have been no salvation through the cross and resurrection so you see it couldn't possibly be mere symbolism.
It's symbolic. Meaning it is not the literal body and blood of JESUS. HE is resurrected with a glorified body and is restored with the glory HE had with the FATHER before the world began. Even when they did communion in the upper room with CHRIST HIMSELF. It was symbolic.
@Rylie22 He doesn't believe in three gods. But he believes in the One True God of the bible. Can you tell me what you believe? Are you a follower of Armstrong?
@Christo Chaney Is not a Christian term. In the jewish sages make also the implication of God the Father and most importantly in Proverbs 30:4, which says: Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell? Proverbs 30:4 In this verse mentions that God has a son, which means that God is the Father, God the Father and God the Son.
@@diegovalleperez3360 look at what it says before that. It mentions the name of a man called Agur son of Jakeh of Massa, the speech of the man to Ithiel and Ucal. The questions he’s asking are rhetorical. Is Exodus 4.21-23 the people of Israel is referred to as Gods firstborn son. David is also called Gods son in Psalm 89.20. Similar to King Solomon also being called Gods son in 1st Chronicles 22.9 and there are more cases of this in the Jewish Bible. It’s so easy to take one single verse and isolate it from the larger context and come up with a belief about it. But when people do so…they often turn out to be wrong if you can see the flaws in it.
@Christo Chaney Wrong interpretation of the passage. Proverbs 30 is Agur’s conclusions. This chapter is dedicated to rebuking the two boys, Ithiel and Ucal. He asked them 5 rhetorical questions, each of which has the same answer as the sixth and last question: The questions are through verse 4. But before verse 4, verse 3 mentions that Agur is talking about the Holy One (God). That son, is the Son of God, not the first born of Exodus, or David, or Salomon. Agur is speaking about God’s eternal attributes with his Son, David neither Salomon or the first born of Exodus shared those attributes with God. Even the jewish sages admit that these son is the messiah which is God. You can read the book “Minhat Eliyahu”. In this book they called that son in Proverbs 30:4, the messiah and the book of zohar calls the messiah, God himself.
@@diegovalleperez3360 1. This book was written by one man and if he claims that this son mentioned in Proverbs is the Messiah than that is his take on it. Who else agrees with what he said? 2. The Zohar is very deep mystical stuff. Mystical cannot always be taken literally. In the Zohar it claims that the tablets were solid sapphire and the letters miraculously floated in the air. You want to accept that literally?
Commenting on the question on minute 37 (the Christian trying to keep the laws in the torah): the epistle of St. Paul (who used to be a zealot Jew) to the Galatians was written specifically to tell the Galatians NOT to follow the “customary or ceremonial laws” of the OT. St. Paul went to the point of calling them foolish for doing that. Of course there is the moral laws (do not kill, steal, do not commit adultery etc.); all these we must follow and go beyond and above in the NT. However, we would be called foolish by the Holy Spirit if we do any of the ceremonial/customs law of the OT (eating certain things, keeping the new moon, the Sabbath) etc. All these things were symbols and shadow of the blessings to come. Now we are in the reality (Jesus). It’s like a child playing with children’s fake toy money, which is a cymbol of the real thing. When this child grows up and becomes a man, when he keeps in his pocket both the real money together with the child’s toy money, he would be called foolish and silly. The people in the OT were little children spiritually. In Christ Jesus we are supposed to grow spiritually.
quote---However, we would be called foolish by the Holy Spirit if we do any of the ceremonial/customs law of the OT (eating certain things, keeping the new moon, the Sabbath) etc. All these things were symbols and shadow of the blessings to come. Now we are in the reality (Jesus). unquote Quote the WORDS of God that says the Sabbath is a symbol!!!! Is the law against murser a symbol? Theft? Adultery??? If what you say is true, WHY did the women followers of Christ keep the Sabbath that Friday evening??? Luke 23:56 Why did the apostles keep the Sabbath in Acts???? Apparently Christ NEGLECTED to tell anyone, including His mother, that the Sabbath was only a symbol of His death. That makes Jesus SINNER by OMISION!!!! NOT qualified to be our Savior!!!
"The fullness was pleased to dwell in Him" -Gifted and from the will of another It is the Fathers Deity that dwells in Jesus The works Jesus performed testify that the Father is in Him and they are One in that manner. Just as in the Son of Man it was the Father in Jesus in the beginning doing His work. "All things were made through Him and For Him" What I see is the Father stating His Will "Let Us..."
No reputable Theologian would cite Gen 1:26 to prove personal distinctions in God. The Hebrew grammar forbids it. The vs says "God said" and the verb is singular, meaning a singular God spoke to a second party. If God were a Trinity, which i don't believe He is, but just for sake of perspective, then the Trinity addressed a second party in the vs. Classical Jewish scholarship has always held the identity of that second party to be the angels. Vs 27 as well as many other passages identify God as sole creator, therefore the image shared between God and the angels is what man was to be made in.
@@TheSoulWinnersGuide I don't need to ask man as I can see the Father stating His will. "let us" Jesus was the craftsman at the Fathers side in the beginning. Its clear in the NT that all things were made through Jesus and for Jesus. That Jesus is before all things. He is called God in that beginning. "In Him the fullness was pleased to dwell" Where I would differ is that it is the Fathers Deity that dwells in Jesus and in that Jesus is all that the Father is, (God), and He and the Father are one. Jesus is seen by me as a Son. Gods firstborn and the beginning of the creation of God. He has His own spirit, "Father into your hands I commit My spirit" Jesus's Spirit was formed by God as the first of His works and it was the Fathers will that in His firstborn all HIS fullness should dwell. (gifted not formed) The Son is the reflection of Gods glory and the exact imprint of Gods being. The image of the invisible God. The name He inherited, (mighty God), is superior to the angels of God. God has appointed His firstborn as the heir of all things and has sworn Jesus is a priest FOREVER.
@@randyw.8781 No reputable scholar would say the "us" in Gen 1:26 refers to personal distinctions within God. The Hebrew language of the text forbids it.
@@TheSoulWinnersGuide The Father stated "let us" That's Him and someone else. This is different from "God stated I will make man in my image and my likeness"
Well, maybe you do not believe in the Real presence because you share the protestant theology, which is not in line with the beliving of the fathers of the Church who had magisterium and the apostolic sucession. No offense. You must understand, even more than regular protestants, of the importance of tradition, because jewish tradition also comunicates its theology as oral revelation. SO, Jesus said "For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink." Key is in "real" not "figuratively", he does not say it was a symbol. When he said "(the words) are spirit" its because he refers to the substance. He himself is The Word made flesh, and this is writen in John, where the passage of the bread of life is given which is also words and spirit. When Jesus did it for the first time, consecrating bread and wine, it is understood that the species share through His will the divine substance, it has His spirit, because regular bread does not, its innert.
Another overlooked piece of YHWH's visit to abraham is how He(YHWH on eartg) called fire from YHWH out of heaven to destroy sodom and gomorah
That was Jesus calling Fire out of Heaven from the Father!
Thank you Dr Brown for being a great vessel for the kingdom of the Lord almighty ❤️❤️❤️
This channel is such an invaluable resource! 😎
god does not think skibel is an invaluable resource
@Toby22 it’s not 3 gods . I John 5:7 says there are 3 that bear witness in heaven and they are 1
Now this is what I call true Witnessing to other, about Jesus. A simple conversation with simple and straight answers. Gracefully bow out and give blessing. Now let God do his miracle with His Grace.
God Almighty Father Son and Holy Spirit 3 in one True God Hallelujah 🙏
3are 1 not in
@childofgod4913 open your eyes and heart to the Truth of God's Holy Word the Bible starting with Genesis all the way to Revelation ask the Holy Spirit to give you understanding of what you are reading I ask this in Jesus name Amen 🙏 I will be praying you will God bless you Friend
@@johnnemeth825 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:8-9 KJV) keep praying for revelation God isn’t a trinity nor is he a person God is spirit read your Bible
Where Jesus said I am Lord ???
@@hafizhasnainashraf3565 the whole Bible says Jesus is Lord
Why in Joshua 5:14-17 does the angel also tell Joshua to remove his shoes for the "place is holy" if that is not the norm for an angelic presence?
2:00 @AskDrBrown get someone on staff to get the link from the ad and you can stop up to 500 advertisers currently from running on your channel in your ad sense account.
I ask people to send me inappropriate ads and then block them. You can do similar.
👍
Speaking of inappropriate ads popping up on Christian teaching channels; I was watching one the other day, and an ad popped up for some kind of canned vodka drink. Not that the ad in itself was offensive, but it was rather inappropriate to the audience the video was targeted to. I guess it just goes to show that the world, the flesh, and the devil never sleeps -- open for business 24-7.
Just as an aside, when I was younger, I was well on the way to alcoholism, which runs in my family. My mom used to put beer in my baby bottle 🍼 to get me to shut up. Nevertheless, I didn't become a big fan of alcohol till I was about twenty (drinking age was 18, but I had been going into bars since I was 16), however, some fairly short time after I was saved, I actually became extremely allergic to beer -- like anaphylactic shock after a few sips! I had never been allergic to anything before that time, so I didn't realize that was what was going on. To show you how young and stupid I was, it took about seven or eight seriously near death experiences (with never any medical treatment) before I grasped the concept that I should NOT have even a social beer with my buddies. I can still drink distilled alcohol, but even a tiny bit, like a tenth of an ounce -- makes me feel terrible, not a reaction, just I can feel it in my system -- very unpleasant -- I can hardly believe I used to enjoy that feeling! A few years later when I took first responder training and advanced first aid and learned what anaphylaxis was; I realized just how lucky I had been. I truly believe that if the Lord Jesus had not wanted me alive for some reason, I would have died, because at least one of first instances -- I was deep in the woods in a place my friend and I had to get to on our dirt bikes. A place NOT easy to reach even on foot, and impossible for an ambulance or even a car. This was in the late seventies and there were no cell phones or GPS. No way to call for help, no way to tell anyone where we were, and no way to give directions to us either. We knew how to get back out, but could not have told anyone where we were. Anyway, after a couple of hours I was well enough to ride home, but it took several other experiences before I figured out that I really shouldn't have beer! I still don't know what is in the stuff that causes me to react like that, but apparently beer allergies are not uncommon.
God works in mysterious ways indeed!
🙏✝️🙏
Thank God!🙏🏿❤
Great teaching, very informative. Thank you for sharing.
The text the early Christians used was the Greek Septuagint, not the Hebrew "bible".
Oh the mystery of the Unbegotten and Uncreated, no beginning no end, God!!
Here YWHW is talking!
Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. Isaiah 48:16
god does not accept skibel
@@treksta2009 dr brown hates skibel and so does god
lol ....you mean YHWH? hahahaha
@@mrluke13 Ehye Asher Ehye
Or perhaps Isaiah is interjecting there and calling everyone to listen to him before he continues giving God’s message.
Dr Brown, since 'im' is plural in Hebrew, can Elohim be translated as, God the Father, God the Son, & God the Holy Spirit?
God is one and we all agree. The problem happens when we begin to create complex doctrines based on a psychoanalysis of God. It’s beyond any of us to actually know this which is why the scripture never tries to explain it. God is one period. Accept it and don’t be tempted to explain the unknowable. Paul says “great is the mystery”… yet we think it’s not. We could bring a rabbi, a Christian proponent of the trinity, and a Christian proponent for the oneness to a debate and they’d all be able with scripture to convince a certain amount of people of their point. It’s complicated and beyond any of us knowing with any certainty. Also, just pointing out that Revelation says there’s 7 spirits. There’s a reason the scripture Time and time again reminds us God is one and that’s because he knows the temptation of man to explain what we don’t actually know and seeing stories and statement from scripture tempts us to explain. No criticism of others just the way I see things.
Your thinking is a little dangerous because doctrine is very important. We have to strive to believe in the right doctrine. Going by your standards, Mormons and Jehovah's witnesses are also saved.
@56.00- Isn't a ram a male lamb?
Muslims say that in the quran, as you said, Dr. Brown: the king says WE, although he thinks only of himself... But Muslims always say that do not add anyone to Allah, but Allah adds others to himself and shares his glory with everyone because he says for himself: WE...
The evidence which is rock solid for the presense in the Old Testament is something Godvgave me 7 Years ago. In KjV most of the Ot verses except the first verse start with AND. ! Even after a full stop !!! It’s is the same in the Jewish Bible. The verses after first verse start with VAV. Means nail. Who has nail ? Yeshua. And is a connecting word in Hebrew also. It connects things right? Jesus is the connection between you and God !
So in Genesis ch 18, it was God(Jesus) and two Angels as if you read verses 21-22 the Men Abraham saw as the Lord went to Sodom but Abraham still stood before the Lord and if you read Genesis ch 19 vs 1, you’ll see that it was two Angels that’s arrived at sodom. Then reading verse 24, the Lord rained down fire and brimstone upon sodom and gomorrah from the Lord out of heaven. That’s very clear that God was on earth and God was in heaven. Verse 27 made it clearer.
The Trinity in the Old Testament (NASB). Hebrew added to NASB verses from Strong 's Concordance in ( ). Notice the spelling, Lord GOD and LORD God. (KJV,NASB,ESV).
Isaiah 48
16 Come near to Me, listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, From the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord GOD(אֲדֹנָי ’ăḏônây) ,(יְהוִֹה yhwh) has sent Me, and His Spirit(רוּחַ rûaḥ).”
17 Thus says the LORD(יְהוָֹה yhwh), your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, “I am the LORD your God,(יְהוָֹה yhwh) (אֱלֹהִים ’elôhîym), who teaches you to profit, Who leads you in the way you should go.
ONE GOD, THREE persons.
1- Lord(אֲדֹנָי ’ăḏônây) GOD(יְהוִֹה yhwh) has sent Me, and His Spirit(רוּחַ rûaḥ). This is the Father which no man has ever seen.
2- LORD(יְהוָֹה yhwh) your God(אֱלֹהִים ’elôhîym). The Son. the Redeemer, and creator incarnated as Jesus.
3- His Spirit(רוּחַ rûaḥ).
Gen. 1:1, In the beginning God (אֱלֹהִים ’elôhîym) created the heavens and the earth.
Ezek. 28:12, Son of man ... ‘This is what the Lord GOD (אֲדֹנָי ’ăḏônây) ,(יְהוִֹה yhwh) says .....
Why jesus is noy mentioned in the old T by name as it is in New T?
Ia there a clear distinction between God the father and the Holy Spirit in the Hebrew description. I ask as it sounds plausible that God the father could be described as the Holy Spirit. Any help on this would be great.
Isaiah says God sends his spirit out which implies distinction and that the spirit is send by God.
What about Jacob wrestles with God was that an angel or Jesus?
Well my friend, after that “Angel” left, Jacob said he has seen God face to face now
Hosea confirms that it was an angel (Hosea 12:4). When the text says he wrestled with “elohim” it could mean god-like ones (e.g. Psalm 82:6), in the same sense that when Judah is called a lion, it means a lion-like one. Or the angel could actually be called God since it went in the name of God as God’s messenger. And this is like in Isaiah 7:10 where when Isaiah speaks to Ahaz, the text says “and YHVH spoke to Ahaz.”
@@nb3500 read Hosea:12:4-6. Also the Son of God is the Lord of hosts all through the Old Testament, for truly I say to you, no one has ever seen the Father, yet so many “seen God” and oh they did see God my friend, The Son of God.
@@AndrewFisherOfMen Am I missing something in verses 5-6? And when the text says that someone “saw God (“elohim” or the shortened form “el”), like before those words can easily be understood as they saw a god-like being. Moreover, it’s not sensible that someone can be said to see God, but not see the Father, since those words are synonymous and cannot be separated when referring to the one, true God. There is no “God the Father” in the sense of that’s only one person in a set. But rather it’s “God *comma* the Father”, as in Malachi, “Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us?” (Malachi 2:10) The term “Father” is simply used for God in recognition of His role of Creator, and that’s why it can’t be separated from his title as God.
Have you asked Jesus and the Holy Spirit if the Eucharist is truly the Lord's body and blood as the Church (Catholic and Orthodox) has taught for 2000 years? I understand that you have reasoned your symbolic understanding because you say on Holy Thursday at the Seder meal that the bread and wine could not be His body and blood because He had not died on the cross yet. But are not all things possible with God? And why didn't Jesus point out to those Jews who were horrified in John 6 that they shouldn't fear being cannibalistic since He was only speaking symbolically. He just let them go away being horrified when He could have easily have explained this? I don't think so. Especially since He asked His own disciples if they were going to leave as well. Anyway, I'm a Catholic and I praise God that He gives Himself so intimately to us in the Holy Eucharist. I thank you and bless you for your ministry and your devotion to our Lord. I pray that you continue to lead so many to the Father. I am just sorry that so many of my Christian brothers and sisters are deprived of the true Eucharist, an incomprehensible miracle that sanctifies us.
@@eekimi9692 Thank you for taking the time to write to me, but I have a question for you. What did Jesus mean when at the Passover Seder when He took the bread and said, "THIS IS MY BODY," and then when He took the chalice of wine, He said, "THIS IS MY BLOOD." He did not say the bread was a symbol of His body not did He say the wine was a symbol of His blood. Sorry, all the early fathers of the Church like Justin Martyr were very clear about the bread and wine actually becoming the body and blood of the Lord. Google on the writings of the early Church fathers. Don't take my word for it. Do you really think God, as you noted above who clued in Noah on clean and unclean animals left the Church without the Holy Spirit for 1500 years until the Protestant reformers came along? Why do the Orthodox proclaim that the Eucharist is the body and blood of our Lord. Except for Protestants, this is and has been the teaching of the Church from the beginning. God bless you and open your eyes to the truth.
Jesus still in body , next to the Father, how can his corpse be eaten and his blood drunk, when blood is prohibited for consumption?? Don’t work for the food that perish, so the wafers don’t end in the sewerage system??
Is the Trinity in the Old Testament?
=============================
" But many doctrines are accepted by evangelicals as being clearly taught in the scripture for which there are NO proof texts. The doctrine of the Trinity furnishes the best example of this. It is fair to say that the Bible does NOT clearly teach the doctrine of the trinity. In fact, there is NOT ONE proof text...."
-Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Trinitarian,
Professor, Dallas Theological Seminary,
"Basic Theology", pg89
"The distinction between the one "ousia" (essence) and the three "hypostaseis" (substances) represents NOTHING in either the Old Testament or the New Testament. When the Western Church used "substantia" instead of "essentia" for "ousia", and "persona" instead of "substantia" for "hypostasis", and when the "personae" even came to be thought of as three distinct persons in something, like our common sense of the word, theology went even FARTHER AFIELD FROM the straight path of Biblical Monotheism."
-Professor M. Burrows, Yale Divinity School,
An Outline of Biblical Theology, pg 81
"Today Scholars generally AGREE that there is NO doctrine of the Trinity as such in either the O.T. or the N.T.. It would go far BEYOND the intention and thought-forms of the O.T. to suppose that a late fourth-century or thirteenth-century Christian doctrine can be found there. Likewise, the N.T. does NOT contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity."
-Encyclopedia of Catholicism, pgs564-565
"The doctrine (Trinity) is NOT found in it's fully developed form in the scriptures. Modern Theology does NOT seek to find it in the O.T.. At the time of the Reformation the Protestant Church took over the doctrine of the Trinity WITHOUT serious examination."
-New International Encyclopedia, vol23, pg477
"....it (Trinity) is NOT taught clearly or explicitly taught ANYWHERE in the Scripture....There really is NO explicit statement of the doctrine of the Trinity in the Bible,....It is UNLIKELY that ANY TEXT of Scripture can be shown to teach the doctrine of the Trinity in a clear, direct, and unmistakable fashion."
-God in Three Persons, M.J. Erickson,
Research Professor of Theology,
S.W. Baptist Theological Seminary
"The Doctrine of the Trinity itself, however, is NOT a Biblical doctrine…. The ecclesiastical doctrine of the Trinity is the product of philosophical speculation which is REMOTE from the thought of the Bible"
-Emil Brunner, 1949, Westminister Press, "The Christian Doctrine of God"
"Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew Scriptures: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4)."
-Ref: Encyclopedia Brittanica
"The explicit doctrine (Trinity) was thus formulated in the POST-BIBLICAL period. Attempts to trace the origins still earlier to the O.T. literature CANNOT be supported by historical-critical scholarship. The formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great Church Councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is NOT TO BE FOUND in the N.T."
-Harper-Collins Bible Dictionary, pgs1052-1053
Commenting on minute 36 (wiping the animals or people: the Lord Jesus never wiped anything or anyone. The wip was used to make a sound on the ground that made the animals start moving. So the wip was a moving mechanism to direct such a huge number of animals to out of the temple. This could have been the only loud sound animals would understand and react to. So as the Lord Jesus wipped the ground, the animals (many) would start moving away from the sound and eventually drove them all out of the temple.
@ASKDrBrown dear brother, since you are fluent in Hebrew, can you please explain what is the baptism of fire John the Baptist mentioned that Jesus would be baptizing (Matthew 3:11)?
Is it related to what Jesus has mentioned in Mark 10:38-40
I'm no expert but wouldn't that passage be in common Greek of the time?
Matthew is written in greek
“His winnowing shovel is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn. But the chaff he will burn with fire that never goes out.””
Matthew 3:12 CSB
The verse afterwards indicates that fire is the judgement
This in no way takes away from the fiery nature of The Holy Spirit but the fire mentioned is not talking about Him
“Look, the Lord will come with fire - his chariots are like the whirlwind - to execute his anger with fury and his rebuke with flames of fire.”
Isaiah 66:15 CSB
Hope this helps
Here is my understanding of the trinity. Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong: In the trinitarian conception, the word "God" is a collective noun like the words "human" and "cattle." There’s only one "human" species and one "cattle" species, but many instances (examples) of each. Each individual person is a human, but is distinct from every other human, which doesn't mean that there are many human. Similarly, there are many cows in the world, but each is a cattle. So, there is one class of beings called "God", but 3 distinct instances of beings belonging to the God class. In Christian theology, these are "the Father", "the Son" and the "Holy Spirit". So, there are not 3 Gods, but one God with distinct instances just like there is one, not a billion, human species with about 8 billion instances (examples) of people, each one of which is a human. Like people have different roles and entitlements, so the 3 instances of God. The highest form of religious worship (as in prayer) only belongs to Father. However, we pray to HIM in the name of the SON (Jesus) who is an intermediary between us and HIM. The Father grants our requests (the subject of our prayer) through the agency of the HOLY SPIRIT, so each member of the "God family" has HIS role in regard to the rest of the cosmos including us human beings. Other than the highest form religious worship (prayer), due to the Father only, all 3 "God beings" or instances of "God" can receive other forms of worship (reverence, praise, gratitude, obeisance, obedience, adulation, etc.) from us. In fact, the Bible allows us to give some of these to humans as well. E.g. , children are instructed to obey their parents, wives are admonished to submit to their husbands and all Christians are to obey all governmental/constituted authorities as long as they do not conflict with their attributing the highest form of Relgious worship to the Father. So, for example, a Christian can not pray to a president or emperor and should not obey any government law that forbids him from praying to God or obeying God's command to "gather in worship with other believers", i.e., to attend church and other Christian fellowships. A Christian should be ready to pay the price of death if necessary in that circumstance. I think there's no difficulty understanding the trinity in this way nor any logical inconsistency.
Sorry but you are over complicating the trinity. Try to use a better example.
In the Garden of Gethsame, Jesus is praying. Luke 22:42
42 “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
On the cross: Matt 27:46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
Luke 23:34 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
Luke 23:46 Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit”;
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
Father, Son and Spirit.
>>
if Jesus was Lord why he did not revealed Verses like John 10:30 I amd Father are 1 in old Testament ? Why He did not order to Worship him? In New Testament Jesus said God to Father 165 times but why He did not even say 1 time God to Himself?
@@mitchellosmer1293 Yes. My understanding is that the Office of the Father is greater than that of the Son, but the two are "equal in nature", i.e., are both spirits, uncreated, eternal, deity, etc.
@@poorchristopher15 Could you suggest any, please?
@@mathewsamuel1386 In the Garden of Gethsame, Jesus is praying. Luke 22:42
42 “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
On the cross: Matt 27:46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
Luke 23:34 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
Luke 23:46 Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit”;
Who is Jesus talking to? Himself??
If he spirit is that of God, then Jesus lied!!!
Father, Son and Spirit.
>>
if Jesus was Lord why he did not revealed Verses like John 10:30 I amd Father are 1 in old Testament ? Why He did not order to Worship him? In New Testament Jesus said God to Father 165 times but why He did not even say 1 time God to Himself?
“The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306).
“There is in the Old Testament no indication of distinctions in the Godhead; it is an anachronism to find either the doctrine of the Incarnation or that of the Trinity in its pages” (“God,”Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. 6, p. 254).
“Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity” (The Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. Mircea Eliade, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987, Vol. 15, p. 54).
“The Old Testament tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit…. There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead…. Even to see in the Old Testament suggestions or foreshadowings or ‘veiled signs’ of the Trinity of persons, is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers” (Edmund J. Fortman, The Triune God, Baker Book House, 1972, pp. xv, 8, 9).
Brown you are a shame for our people, there is nothing in the Old Testament that confirms the fact that God is triune. The story of the "two powers" was used by Philo who was a heretic, it doesn't matter that he was one of us (a son of Israel) if a Jew was a heretic, his thought cannot be used to identify Jewish thought biblical, because the biblical Hebrew thought is transmitted by the Bible (Old and New Testament) the rest is not the Word of God, so it cannot be used to interpret what is written in the Bible, this is a very serious matter. Philo was influenced by Plato's thought (and other philosophers), he even went so far as to define the logos as "second god" and this shows that he was a heretic. And his heresies have influenced some false Christians such as Origen who also spoke of a "second god" (Contra Celsum 5,39). It was Philo who claimed that the Angel of YHWH was the logos, because for him, influenced by philosophy, he considered God as transcendent and therefore he did not manifest himself at his creation but the logos did, since for Philo the Logos was the mediator between God and his creation (and the logos of Philo was not that of the New Testament), and this is very similar to what the heretic Justin martyr said, and to what you Trinitarians of today say, who see the Son and not the Father in the manifestations of God described in the Old Testament. But this is not what the Bible teaches in Shemot 3: 6 the Angel of YHWH said:
ויאמר אנכי אלהי אביך אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב
However, he was a manifestation of God and not another "person" (the same is true for the manifestation of God in Genesis 18). The concept of multiple persons in God does not come from the Bible and our fathers would probably have seen it for what it is, that is, polytheism.
You polytheists are no different from the polytheistic he-re-tic Tertullian (who later believed the false prophet Montano, so it should be clear what kind of character we are talking about) from what he said commenting on Genesis 1:26.
The Jew Saadia Gaon in his ספר האמונות והדעות (sefer haemunot vehaDeot) said that Genesis 1:26 did not speak of angels, (which is a misinterpretation because that נעשה would imply that the angels would have participated in our creation, and is not so) but said that God used a non-numeral qualitative plural (indicating what some call majesty). What you do not want (and / or probably you cannot) understand is that we do not find this specific use by the Israelite kings because NOBODY dared USE THAT PLURAL EXPRESSION, WHICH GOD (and only HIM) used and which was reported IN THE TORAH (and then again in Isaiah 6 ) although we find something similar said by King David, in 1 Kings 1:33, where David speaks of himself (not in the first person) in the plural אדניכם.
Brown, you are serving the false Trinitarian god not the True God of Israel Jesus Christ, the God of the Bible, the God who gave the Torah to our fathers who were at Mount Sinai and manifested himself in the flesh as Jesus Christ. All the ways in which Trinitarians try to find trinity in the Bible are as rid-icu-lous as those of Muslims who think they find mention of their false prophet Muhammad in God's Word.
Ri-dicu-lous as those who still try to argue that the trinity comes from Jewish thought using a pseudo-epigraphic text such as the Zohar, which has now been refuted years ago by Gershom Scholem, in fact it is not an ancient text as some believe but was written in Spain in 13th century, and also Yehuda Liebes also argues that it was precisely the doctrine of the trinity that influenced certain statements of the Zohar. The Hebrew terms elohim and echad also do not confirm the doctrine of the trinity.
Brown, the God of Israel Jesus Christ is against you
God of Israel Jesus Christ is not against skibel
Who talk to Moses in the burning bush?
@@albusai
As I said in my previous comment to the Tritheist Brown, the מלאך יהוה (Angel of YHWH) was a manifestation of God and not another "person" (a concept absent in biblical Hebrew thought). The Angel of YHWH spoke in the first person to Moshe saying "I (אנכי) am the God of your father, the God of Avraham, the God of Yitzhak, and the God of Ya'akov" (Shemot 3:6). And the verse continues in a way that shows that Moshe had really understood that the Angel of YHWH was YHWH, in fact it says “And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God (haelohim). And this is also evident from Devarim 33:16 where it is written: "... the favor of him who dwells in the bush. So it was God who spoke to Moshe from the burning bush. My fathers (the ancient Israelites) knew that the Angel of YHWH was YHWH himself, this teaches the Old Testament. The problem arose later, especially with that heretic of my people, Philo of Alexandria, who taught that the Angel of the Lord was the logos (De Somniis 1,228-239 ; De cherubim 1-3) and for Philo the logos it was distinct from God but however divine (in fact as I have already said he also called it second god) but this is not what the Tanakh teaches, in which, it is never said that the Angel of YHWH was the Word of God. The Trinity it is a satanic doctrine developed by men, it has nothing to do with biblical Jewish thought.
*Jesus Christ is the God of Israel YHWH*
@@-charutz6732 We Christians do not believe that there are three Gods but we believe that there is one God, but in this one God three persons coexist, they are indivisible and have the same essence. I quote to you Israelite signs from the Old Testament to distinguish the Holy Triune God: •Gen. 1.26. •Gen. 3.22. •Gen. 11.7. • Is. 6.3. • Is. 6.1 • Gen. 18, 1 and ex. as the end of the chapter. •Gen. 19,24 • Psal. 32.6 •Soph. G. 16, 12-13 •Soph. G. 18, 15-15: •Soph. G. 9, 1-19 • Psal. 109, 1 • Psal. 2 •Prov. 1:20-33 •Dan. 7.13 • Is. 52.13 • Is. 7.14 •Soph. Series. 24.1 •Soph. Series. 1.1 • Zach. b' 12-15- Hebrew text: b' 8-11). • Psalm. md' 7-8H •Hospitality of Abraham • Is. at 1-10 Psalm 110:3.
•Is.48:16
In genesis 1:26.
It says let us make a man in our image to whom God is talking to?
If there is no Trinity then prove it
It is supported in other texts. Genesis 11...let us go down even though THE LORD was already down. YHWH takes council about how the king would die. The council is in psalms 82 and 89 and in Job.
I’m still disappointed! Nothing in Genesis 18 says angels. It says clearly three men who are the Lord. Chapter 19 continues with two “messengers” who are still called the Lord in Hebrew all the way to 19:2;18;24. Three who are YHVH in human form. Common Dr. Brown. That is the plain reading of the text. 😉
Yes it does they were 2 angels and God himself in human form. The 2 angels after the meal they ate went to to sodom and Gomorrah as commanded by God. The Lord stayed back answering Abrahams questions.
@@shio_sakaki_the_legend392 No, chapter 18 does not say two “angels”. Please read the chapter and look at the Hebrew. Three men appeared as YHVH. That is the plain reading of the text.
@@dralgarzaGenesis 18:20- Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.”
22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the Lord.[d] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare[e] the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing-to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?”
Notice the 2 men went to sodom and God stayed behind with Abraham answering his questions. Next chapter explains who the 2 men were when they got to sodom and met Lot the only righteous person in that area. That they were angels sent by the Lord to destroy sodom and Gomorrah. The Lords used in 19:2 is 'lords' with a small 'l' which indicates its not speaking about Yahweh. Even abraham was called lord by his wife, it does not mean he's Yahweh all of a sudden. Chapter 19 starts of by telling you that the 2 men are angels.
@@shio_sakaki_the_legend392 Again, please refer to the Hebrew which calls all three who appeared "Adonai" regardless if they were "messengers." Lot called the two "Adonai" twice and Moses refers to all three YHVH in Genesis 19:24. The Hebrew is clear.
Your 19:2 is Adonai in Hebrew and not "lords" or Adoni. Your English is wrong. And in verse 19:18 it is Adonai too.
So please read from the Hebrew.
@@dralgarza nothing you said made sense, the entire 19 chapter the 2 men are referred to as angels and God is referred to as 'Lord' big 'L' meaning Yahweh. Small 'lord' Adonai ( אֲדֹנָי, lit. "My Lords") is the plural form of adon ("Lord") along with the first-person singular pronoun enclitic. ... The singular forms adon and adoni ("my lord") are used in the Hebrew Bible as royal titles, as in the First Book of Samuel, and for distinguished persons. Again adonai has been used as titles for alot of important people in the old testament. It does not mean that they are Yahweh 'Lord' very big difference.
Genesis 19:12-The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here-sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.”
14 So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were pledged to marry[a] his daughters. He said, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the Lord is about to destroy the city!” But his sons-in-law thought he was joking.
Notice the angels recognize and address God as Yahweh 'Lord' and not themselves. The point is that God has sent his angles to do his work that he himself is overseeing. The same way an angel appeared to Moses in the bushes and spoke as God because that is what he was sent to do but made clear he is not God but only a messenger. Back to your word Adonai, One of the most prominent names used for God in the Old Testament is the name Adonai. Adonai is a Hebrew word that translates as "Lord" of "Lord Master" from its derivation "sovereignty". People throughout the Old Testament used the word Adonai when addressing humans who were master or lord over them. Do learn the difference because saying all 3 men were God makes no sense because alot of verses in the same chapter refute your claim.
Ps. Chapter 18 starts with the 'Lord' big L referring to Yahweh appearing to abraham very clear, then Abraham addresses them as masters or adonai in general. Then chapter 19 reveals who the other 2 men are. Very simple.
I agree. Genesis 18 says 3 men, and 1 is YHVH. 2 of the men go to Sodom, and 1 (called YHVH) stays back and has a conversation with Abraham. In Genesis 19:24 it say " Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the Lord out of the heavens". If the 3 "men" are all YHVH, who's the 4th YHVH then that is in the Heavens raining down fire and brimstone while the YHVH who talked to Abraham initiated it? It's the WORD of YHVH (aka the Son, the Presence, The Angel of YHVH, the Logos) in flesh form with 2 angels, imo. Like the Ark of the covenant; 2 cherubim and the Presence/Angel/Glory of YHVH in between them. bless you all.
No 3 men arw YHWH.
Genesis 18 doesn't say 3 men are YHWH. Only the man that stays behind and talks to Abraham is YHWH.
@@poorchristopher15 I agree (as my original post says), 2 of the men are angels, 1 is the LORD who Abraham spoke with and he asked if Sodom could be spared.. the start of Genesis 19 makes it pretty clear. Some people think the '3 men' are all YHWH in Gen 18 ; I disagree with that assertion. 1 was the LORD, the 2 that left earlier for Sodom were angels as Gen 19 shows. Genesis 19:24 "Then *the Lord* rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from *the Lord* out of the heavens. ".. It literally says Lord twice. My point was, if the 3 men in Gen 18 are all YHWH, then Gen 19:24 introduces a 4th YHWH figure which makes no sense.
@@johnscott7937I would rethink your interpretation of Genesis 19:24. The text doesn’t seem like it’s saying that there are two YHVHs but simply saying who rained down the fire and brimstone (God) and who they came from (also God). We find a similar literary occurrence in 1 Kings 8:1: “Then *Solomon* assembled the elders of Israel, and all the heads of the tribes, the chief of the fathers of the children of Israel, *unto king Solomon* in Jerusalem…”. Hope this helps.
Great material on the Trinity foreshadowed in the Tanakh. On the real presence in the Eucharist, however, Dr. Brown would do well to read the early church fathers on the matter (they were much closer to the time of the original revelations than we are today) as well as the TH-cam presentations of EUCHARISTIC MIRACLE and take these under consideration in the formation of his position on the matter of the real presence.
Some of the early church fathers writings were altered to make them orthodox. 2Timothy 3:16-17
Communion
How do you labor for the food that endures to eternal life? Believe in me! (John 6:27, 29) “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me [in faith] shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” (John 6:35) “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:40) “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.” (John 6:47)
When the crowd took offense at his gruesome talk, Jesus exposed their unbelief: “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:63-64).
don't stop on v53, John 6:60-61,63 KJV
Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it? [61] When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [63] It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. -> you see, Jesus clarified on v63 that the WORDS HE SPAKE ARE SPIRIT, not LITERAL.
-John 6:35
Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.--unquote
Obviously you have NO understanding of that verse!!!!
READ IT AGAIN!!! "he who comes to Me will not hunger"- his body
"he who believes in Me will never thirst.-"--His blood!!!
Whomever FOLLOWS Jesus will NOT hunger--due to His words!!!
Whomever BELIEVES in Jesus will NOT THIRST--due to His words!!!
>>>>th-cam.com/video/cmVWzhM8Bbk/w-d-xo.html
The Atonement: The Strongest Refutation of Rome's Eucharistic Errors
>>>>>>>
Early church leaders knew nothing of transubstantiation.
The eucharist hardly makes any exegetical since to start with.
Tradition cannot be the will of God if it goes against the word of God.
Jesus uses parallelism in this discourse to equate believing with eating his flesh. Note the parallel between verse 40 and verse 54:
(Jn. 6:40) “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
(Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
.>>According to this parallel, beholding and believing (v.40) are equated with eating and drinking Christ’s flesh (v.54). This is further paralleled by verse 35:
>>(Jn. 6:35) I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.
>>(Jn. 6:54) “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
>>>To “hunger” and “thirst” and parallel to the one who “eats” and “drinks.” But note what Jesus says satisfies our hunger: “He who comes to Me… he who believes in Me.” Jesus isn’t speaking about his literal flesh and blood any more than he is speaking about literal bread (Jn. 6:35) or literal water (Jn. 4:10-14). Indeed, Jesus uses the term sarx for his “body,” rather than the common term sōma (which was the common term used in the Lord’s Supper). Indeed, the “term ‘flesh’ is never used in the NT to refer to the Lord’s Supper.”[4] Hence, this seems “to caution against a sacramental or eucharistic understand of these verses.”[5] This is why Augustine of Hippo wrote regarding this passage: “Believe, and you have eaten.”
>>Jesus works in metaphor’s, analogy and hyperbole. In Mark 8 Jesus uses bread language again anhesd calls out those confused thinking he’s being literal not realizing the spiritual message.
>>The catholic reasoning system will have little influence on the born again believer who’s truly born of the spirit. Those like my self who exegete and derive revelation from the spirit see the heretical lie of transubstantiation.
>>>Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 180) stated that the elements do not lose the nature of bread and wine (Against Heresies, 4.18.4-5; 5.2.2).
>>>Tertullian (AD 200) said Jesus’ statement was figurative (Against Marcion, 3.19).
>>>Clement of Alexandria (AD 200) called the bread and wine symbols of Jesus’ body (The Instructor, I.6).
>>>Origen (AD 250) held his typical allegorical and spiritual view when referring to the elements in the Last Supper.
>>>>Eusebius of Caesarea (AD 340) called the elements the body and blood of Christ, but also referred to them as symbolic of spiritual realities (On the Theology of the Church, 3.2.12).
>>>Augustine (AD 350) believed that John 6:53 should be understood spiritually and symbolically-not literalistically (On Christian Doctrine 3.16.2).
Gelasius I (5th century pope): “The sacrament which we receive of the body and blood of Christ is a divine thing. Wherefore also by means of it we are made partakers of the divine nature. Yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine does not cease to be… Thus, as the elements pass into this, that is, the divine substance by the Holy Ghost, and none the less remain in their own proper nature.”
The Catholic Encyclopedia: “Nowhere in the Old Testament do we find any clear indication of a Third Person.”
Catholic theologian Fortman: “The Jews never regarded the spirit as a person; nor is there any solid evidence that any Old Testament writer held this view. . . . The Holy Spirit is usually presented in the Synoptics [Gospels] and in Acts as a divine force or power.”
The New Catholic Encyclopedia: “The O[ld] T[estament] clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person . . . God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly.” It also says: “The majority of N[ew] T[estament] texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God.”-Italics ours.
A Catholic Dictionary: “On the whole, the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power.”
Hence, neither the Jews nor the early Christians viewed the holy spirit as part of a Trinity. That teaching came centuries later. As A Catholic Dictionary notes: “The third Person was asserted at a Council of Alexandria in 362 . . . and finally by the Council of Constantinople of 381”-some three and a half centuries after holy spirit filled the disciples at Pentecost!
No, the holy spirit is not a person and it is not part of a Trinity. The holy spirit is God’s active force that he uses to accomplish his will. It is not equal to God but is always at his disposition and subordinate to him.
The MOST compelling point to me of the evidence that the Holy Spirit absolutely cannot be a separate entity is this:
The Bible says the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary.
That would make the Holy Spirit Jesus’ father.
That would mean God the Father is actually not Jesus’ father.
That would make Jesus a liar. And God not the father. And the holy spirit then would take the seat as the Father of the godhead/god family. Which is the position Satan has been vying for…to be father/head of the gods. which puts a very sinister slant on the concept of a Trinity. Who is the entity trying to be acknowledged at a level above God?
The holy spirit is a part of GOD just like Christ is a part of GOD. In the old testament, the holy spirit and the Son have a throne.
@@poorchristopher15The Holy Spirit and Christ are not PART of God, they are God. God is not composite, made up of parts. The 3 persons are each 100% God
The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of The Father and of the Son.
We are trying to clarify and define a huge subject in the Vast Universe.
Let us remember that we all are just a few pounds of wet dirt - mud-, AND fallen - besides...
We are using a straight jacket called "god" which is an ancient, foreign, pagan Persan name. We will NEVER even begin to understand anything, until we admit that...
"There is NO "GOD" - anywhere in the Authentic Holy Scriptures ! There is NO Theos, NO Zeus, NO Deus, NO Dios, Puchechamme, (aboriginal Peruvian; imagine having to read: "In the beginning, Puchechamme created the heavens and the earth!) or Burkan (Mongolian) !
Our modern Bible translators, probably ignorantly played to us a major game in translating the UNTRANSLATABLE "ELOHIM")!
We have no problem whatsoever with all the HEBREW, ARAMAIC, Babylonian and even Greek names contained inside The Bible, like Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Chedorlaomer, Amrafel, Melchizedek, Maher-Shalal-hash-baz - but hey - when we come to ELOHIM - that is not to be touched, - unusable... Why?
THAT is The Most Important Name in The Universe !
ELOHIM created The Entire Universe. - billions of Galaxies, which in term each have billions of stars, ELOHIM created the angels, like seraphims and cherubims, who literally cover their faces in the presence of ELOHIM.
But, the modern humans, will not even touch or pronounce The Name of ELOHIM - they substitute The Name of Elohim with PAGAN GODS' NAMES !!!
When we fix this worldwide anomaly we might begin getting somewhere.
ELOHIM (plural), ELOHE, EL (both singular), used in the New Testament EXCLUSIVELY as ABA, Father are the real names of DIVINITY.
Exception: When The Lord Jesus cries out: "Eli, Eli, llamna sabachtani" was still using an OLD Testament term for ELOHIM, but singularized the name because ELOHIM would have meant calling Three Sanctified Names - including HIMSELF !
We need to really go back to square one and study the matter anew - the most important matter in the world !
So there is NO GOD (singular) anywhere, but a single ELOHIM, (plural) in The Universe.
When we begin to understand this holy notion, only then we will begin to understand a bit of Divinity...
Since heavens already are created, in OUR likeness might not mean in rhe likeness of 3 persons of the Trinity. Instead - in the image of many Soms of God who ARE ALREADY CREATED. Read books of Dr. Heiser. Nevertheless the very verb of creation is SINGULAR. Therefore - Sons of God DID NOT participate in the creation of man but GOD ONLY.
Great Talk 🙏
Pharoah worshipped a trinity and so did Jezebel in the old Testament.
The part about Christian gentiles not adhering to the Sinai Covenant was very informative.
quote----The part about Christian gentiles not adhering to the Sinai Covenant was very informative. unquote
What??? All were Jews
Our tradition teaches that when the Torah was given, all Jews were standing at Sinai. Not only all of those who had just exited Egypt, but all Jews who would come into this world in the future were present. Revelation was so important that even Jews who did not yet exist had to witness it directly.
---Quote the Bible about your opinion.
The Trinity is there in the OT, but it's hidden under a veil.
Genesis 1:6-8
[6]And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
[7]And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
[8]And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
These 3 are 1 and in accordance
@Billy HW Here is YWHW is talking!
Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. Isaiah 48:16
@@kevingreen4373 very poor attempt at trying to prove the Trinity from the Jewish Bible.
Lol how
These 3 heavens are 1
We pull fresh water from the earth below..
God gives us fresh water from the heavens above
And the firmament that we stand on is water...
That's y its a "firm"ament..
Wisdom......
Take a look At a map
@@christo-chaney nothing about the bible is Jewish...
But all is Holy
Psalm 24
You're wrong on the eucharist.
Genesis 19:16
There's about 14 million Jews today and most non observant...compared to the 3 BILLION people that know the God of Isreal because of his son and messiah, just think about that, does God only want to save 1 / 100000 of people?
Perfect study... except in one point: "There is NO "GOD" - anywhere in the Authentic Holy Scriptures ! There is NO Theos, NO Zeus, NO Deus, NO Dios, Puchechamme, (aboriginal Peruvian) or Burkan (Mongolian) ! Our modern Bible translators, probably ignorantly played to us a major game in translating the UNTRANSLATABLE "ELOHIM")! We have no problem whatsoever with all the HEBREW, ARAMAIC and even Greek names contained inside The Bible, like Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Chedorlaomer, Amrafel, Melchizedek - but hey - when we come to ELOHIM - that is not to be touched, - unusable... Why? THAT is The Most Important Name in The Universe ! ELOHIM created The Entire Universe. - billions of Galaxies, which in term each have billions of stars, ELOHIM created the angels, like seraphims and cherubims, who literally cover their faces in the presence of ELOHIM. But, the modern humans, will not even touch or pronounce The Name of ELOHIM - they substitute The Name of Elohim with PAGAN GODS' NAMES !!! When we fix this worldwide anomaly we might begin getting somewhere. ELOHIM (plural), ELOHE, EL (both singular), used in the New Testament EXCLUSIVELY as ABA, Father are the real names of DIVINITY. Exception: When The Lord Jesus cries out: "Eli, Eli, llamma sabachtani" was still using an OLD Testament term for ELOHIM, but singularized the name because ELOHIM would have meant three sanctified names - including HIMSELF ! We need to really go back to square one and study the matter anew - the most important matter in the world !
Tovia Singer might make an appearance in these comments.
@Got It th-cam.com/video/VxcUJEEq0Vk/w-d-xo.html&feature=share
He’s pretty much steered clear of brown for a bit sir ... not sure why he would show up in the comments
@Got it Here is YWHW is talking!
Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. Isaiah 48:16
Will he be able to successfully argue against brown?
Tovia probably uses fake accounts to troll the comments 😂
The body and blood are not symbols they're the real body and blood of Christ under the appearance of bread and wine which are symbolic (Jesus being the real bread that sustains us and the true vine) "Unless you eat my body and drink my blood you will not have life within you" hundreds of people had followed Jesus the day after the changing of the fish and two loaves, but when Jesus told them they had to do this everyone of them left him saying this commandment is too much, then Jesus approached Peter on the matter, Peter in faith said where else can I turn, you have the words of eternal life. Jesus preforms this miracle of becoming the true paschal lamb, in the way of Melchizedek the eternal priest who offered bread and wine. If Peter had have left then Jesus ministry would have been over, and then there would have been no salvation through the cross and resurrection so you see it couldn't possibly be mere symbolism.
It's symbolic. Meaning it is not the literal body and blood of JESUS. HE is resurrected with a glorified body and is restored with the glory HE had with the FATHER before the world began. Even when they did communion in the upper room with CHRIST HIMSELF. It was symbolic.
Ok, now let's all got to our neighbors and talk to them about salvation in Christ!!! Oops, there in lies the problem............
What???
The Roman Catholic Church got it wrong.
god thinks skibel got it wrong
@Rylie22 He doesn't believe in three gods. But he believes in the One True God of the bible. Can you tell me what you believe? Are you a follower of Armstrong?
Good stuff
god does not think skibel is good stuff
@@skibel huh? Are referring to yourself?
@@dfw1294 yes
But why everytime it says God created the Heavens the Earth and the seas and all that in them is It always refers to the Father?
It doesn’t say “The Father” as that is a Christian term applied to God.
@Christo Chaney Is not a Christian term. In the jewish sages make also the implication of God the Father and most importantly in Proverbs 30:4, which says:
Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell? Proverbs 30:4
In this verse mentions that God has a son, which means that God is the Father, God the Father and God the Son.
@@diegovalleperez3360 look at what it says before that. It mentions the name of a man called Agur son of Jakeh of Massa, the speech of the man to Ithiel and Ucal. The questions he’s asking are rhetorical. Is Exodus 4.21-23 the people of Israel is referred to as Gods firstborn son. David is also called Gods son in Psalm 89.20. Similar to King Solomon also being called Gods son in 1st Chronicles 22.9 and there are more cases of this in the Jewish Bible. It’s so easy to take one single verse and isolate it from the larger context and come up with a belief about it. But when people do so…they often turn out to be wrong if you can see the flaws in it.
@Christo Chaney Wrong interpretation of the passage. Proverbs 30 is Agur’s conclusions. This chapter is dedicated to rebuking the two boys, Ithiel and Ucal. He asked them 5 rhetorical questions, each of which has the same answer as the sixth and last question: The questions are through verse 4. But before verse 4, verse 3 mentions that Agur is talking about the Holy One (God). That son, is the Son of God, not the first born of Exodus, or David, or Salomon. Agur is speaking about God’s eternal attributes with his Son, David neither Salomon or the first born of Exodus shared those attributes with God.
Even the jewish sages admit that these son is the messiah which is God. You can read the book “Minhat Eliyahu”. In this book they called that son in Proverbs 30:4, the messiah and the book of zohar calls the messiah, God himself.
@@diegovalleperez3360 1. This book was written by one man and if he claims that this son mentioned in Proverbs is the Messiah than that is his take on it. Who else agrees with what he said? 2. The Zohar is very deep mystical stuff. Mystical cannot always be taken literally. In the Zohar it claims that the tablets were solid sapphire and the letters miraculously floated in the air. You want to accept that literally?
Commenting on the question on minute 37 (the Christian trying to keep the laws in the torah): the epistle of St. Paul (who used to be a zealot Jew) to the Galatians was written specifically to tell the Galatians NOT to follow the “customary or ceremonial laws” of the OT. St. Paul went to the point of calling them foolish for doing that. Of course there is the moral laws (do not kill, steal, do not commit adultery etc.); all these we must follow and go beyond and above in the NT.
However, we would be called foolish by the Holy Spirit if we do any of the ceremonial/customs law of the OT (eating certain things, keeping the new moon, the Sabbath) etc.
All these things were symbols and shadow of the blessings to come. Now we are in the reality (Jesus).
It’s like a child playing with children’s fake toy money, which is a cymbol of the real thing.
When this child grows up and becomes a man, when he keeps in his pocket both the real money together with the child’s toy money, he would be called foolish and silly.
The people in the OT were little children spiritually. In Christ Jesus we are supposed to grow spiritually.
quote---However, we would be called foolish by the Holy Spirit if we do any of the ceremonial/customs law of the OT (eating certain things, keeping the new moon, the Sabbath) etc.
All these things were symbols and shadow of the blessings to come. Now we are in the reality (Jesus). unquote
Quote the WORDS of God that says the Sabbath is a symbol!!!!
Is the law against murser a symbol? Theft? Adultery???
If what you say is true, WHY did the women followers of Christ keep the Sabbath that Friday evening??? Luke 23:56
Why did the apostles keep the Sabbath in Acts????
Apparently Christ NEGLECTED to tell anyone, including His mother, that the Sabbath was only a symbol of His death.
That makes Jesus SINNER by OMISION!!!! NOT qualified to be our Savior!!!
"The fullness was pleased to dwell in Him" -Gifted and from the will of another
It is the Fathers Deity that dwells in Jesus
The works Jesus performed testify that the Father is in Him and they are One in that manner.
Just as in the Son of Man it was the Father in Jesus in the beginning doing His work.
"All things were made through Him and For Him"
What I see is the Father stating His Will
"Let Us..."
god took skibel father
No reputable Theologian would cite Gen 1:26 to prove personal distinctions in God. The Hebrew grammar forbids it. The vs says "God said" and the verb is singular, meaning a singular God spoke to a second party. If God were a Trinity, which i don't believe He is, but just for sake of perspective, then the Trinity addressed a second party in the vs. Classical Jewish scholarship has always held the identity of that second party to be the angels. Vs 27 as well as many other passages identify God as sole creator, therefore the image shared between God and the angels is what man was to be made in.
@@TheSoulWinnersGuide I don't need to ask man as I can see the Father stating His will.
"let us" Jesus was the craftsman at the Fathers side in the beginning. Its clear in the NT that all things were made through Jesus and for Jesus. That Jesus is before all things. He is called God in that beginning. "In Him the fullness was pleased to dwell"
Where I would differ is that it is the Fathers Deity that dwells in Jesus and in that Jesus is all that the Father is, (God), and He and the Father are one. Jesus is seen by me as a Son. Gods firstborn and the beginning of the creation of God. He has His own spirit, "Father into your hands I commit My spirit" Jesus's Spirit was formed by God as the first of His works and it was the Fathers will that in His firstborn all HIS fullness should dwell. (gifted not formed) The Son is the reflection of Gods glory and the exact imprint of Gods being. The image of the invisible God. The name He inherited, (mighty God), is superior to the angels of God. God has appointed His firstborn as the heir of all things and has sworn Jesus is a priest FOREVER.
@@randyw.8781 No reputable scholar would say the "us" in Gen 1:26 refers to personal distinctions within God. The Hebrew language of the text forbids it.
@@TheSoulWinnersGuide The Father stated "let us" That's Him and someone else.
This is different from "God stated I will make man in my image and my likeness"
Sorry, Jesus isn’t God, nor equal to God. He called our God and Father his God and Father at John 20:17.
Jesus is the Son of God.
Heretic.
Well, maybe you do not believe in the Real presence because you share the protestant theology, which is not in line with the beliving of the fathers of the Church who had magisterium and the apostolic sucession. No offense. You must understand, even more than regular protestants, of the importance of tradition, because jewish tradition also comunicates its theology as oral revelation. SO, Jesus said "For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink." Key is in "real" not "figuratively", he does not say it was a symbol. When he said "(the words) are spirit" its because he refers to the substance. He himself is The Word made flesh, and this is writen in John, where the passage of the bread of life is given which is also words and spirit. When Jesus did it for the first time, consecrating bread and wine, it is understood that the species share through His will the divine substance, it has His spirit, because regular bread does not, its innert.
Vacation rental by owner ....
god does not let skibel rent a vacation home
@@skibel I did once in another life in another time ...
@@Mellownius i respect that my friend
@@skibel remember this my friend the meek shall inherit the earth ...
@@Mellownius remember this my friend (farts uncontrollably)