Thank you Eric for this video. I never thought about the sinner along side Jesus being saved at the very end of his life. He evidently did not live a Christian life but he repented at that time and was saved. It gives me hope for many people.
I like it when you asked: Who benefits from this confusion of equating Jesus to his Father Jehovah despite all the evidence that clearly shows that Jesus is the son of God? " This question is key to anyone genuinely seeking the truth from the Bible.
Thanks Eric. I like your explanations. Looking forward to working with due at some time in the near future. May Jehovah continue to bless you with knowledge which you would share to us.
@eric wilson; My deepest condolences on the oassing of Dr. James Penton, (27Apr1932-4Nov2024) May our Heavenly Father receive his ever-loved, respected and sacred soul. Thank you Eric for your interviews with Dr. Penton and his books.
Eric you are so correct.....some honest hearted ones just can't accept that they have it wrong. Humility is very much lacking in individuals sometimes. We have to humbly accept and change our thinking when the overwhelming evidence is presented.
Excellent and thought provoking video Eric. Science does not proceed by consensus. At one time, all serious scientists believed in a geocentric universe. Galileo and others (in the minority) said otherwise.
There are also some alternate explanations and renditions. Jewish Bibles render it as: ""For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name; 'the prince of peace'". - Isaiah 9:5 (The Complete Tanach Version) And some Christian scholars also argue this to be more accurate to the grammar, meaning the Messiah is only called "Prince of Peace" 'by' the Everlasting Father, which makes more sense, since the Son is not the Father (unless we argue Covenantal fatherhood which I've suggested as an option). Whereas the LXX says: "That a child was born to us, a son was given to us, whose beginning came upon his shoulder, and his name is called Angel/Messenger of Great Counsel; for I will bring peace upon the rulers and health to him." - Isaiah 9:5 (Swete Greek Septuagint) And here no God or gods are mentioned at all.
@@ProselyteofYah I wasn't aware of the complete Tanach Version. Seems more plausible than the typical masoretic based translation. The key piece of information from the LXX source is that it tells us the Messiah is an angel as opposed to being called a mighty God in other Bible translations. I always thought of Yeshua preexisting as Angel prior to coming to earth in the womb of Mary. There are also a couple of verses in revelations that hints at Jesus having an angelic nature. Personally I think the LXX source is the most accurate and harmonious with the rest of the Bible.
@@Celestial-City It's important also to remember that the term "angel" just means messenger as well. And isn't really the name of a species or creature, but this is a later understanding. All the Heavenly beings are just called spirits or "gods" in the OT. Angel being the "role" that some spirits play.
Logical Fallacies; Their misuse. Hi Eric, I am a great fan of your work. As a research scientist, I greatly appreciate your appeal to WT’s use of logical fallacies to demolish very effectively their convoluted logic. I was therefore very surprised at your own (mis)use of logical fallacies in calling out someone (billybari8081) who challenged your statement, in a discussion you had with them, that “Mighty God” is a “bad translation” in Isa 9:6 and would be better translated as “mighty god”, small “g”. (Jesus is just “a god”, one of many who are called or treated as gods, but who are not (really) God). Billybari8081 replied to you that “he” (I’m assuming) had checked all the translations on Bible Gateway and found that no Bible Translation committee agree with your claim, not even the NWT. Unfortunately, he asked sarcastically at the end of his comment if you thought that you were the only Bible scholar who really understood translation better than all the others, .."really?”!! Nonetheless, you magnanimously acknowledge at the start of the video (with the sub-title “I ..admit that I was wrong”) that you had made a mistake in your comment to Billybari8081. Great, end of story. You were wrong on this specific point, but you may well be correct on all the other points discussed with Billybari8081- a *separate subject* for another day. However, you surprisingly, and pointlessly in my opinion, double down on this *specific point/paragraph* concerning experts and Isa 9:6, which you have just conceded, to argue that Billybari8081is guilty of 4 logical fallacies in his paragraph which (correctly) points out your (admitted) error???? **“Appeal to Popularity” The fact that he went to Bible Gateway to check all the translations, a practice I note that you often recommend, is described as an example of the logical fallacy termed “Appeal to Popularity” This fallacy involves claiming something is correct because many (non-expert) people think something is so. An example would be if I said that Jesus must be “a god” because many (non-expert) JWs believe that. As they are not experts in the Greek and Hebrew languages, even though they *could* be correct, it is not a valid logical argument. If they were all recognised experts in Greek and Hebrew then their opinion would indeed become relevant. Referring to (all) the translation experts in the field is NOT an example of the “Appeal to Popularity” fallacy. **“Appeal to Authority” Even more surprising, you accuse him of using the “Appeal to Authority” fallacy, because … he cited all the leading experts. The “Appeal to Authority” *fallacy* involves claiming that something is correct just because someone famous (marginal or irrelevant) said or believes it. However, it is an acceptable, valid argument if the “Authority” cited is in fact an authority on the subject…even more so when it is referring to the opinion of ALL of the experts in the field. In the video, remember it is specifically addressing your comments regarding Isa 9:6, you accuse Billybari8081 of “accepting an argument as true because scholarly people claim it is so”, rather than addressing the argument. But he *IS* specifically addressing your argument on Isa 9:6. What concerns me most, even more than the misuse of logical fallacies, is your assuming the spiritual high ground, your spiritual one-up-man-ship. Quoting Matt 11:25&26, you point out that intellectuals are often wrong (even though, in this case, you are acknowledging that they are in fact correct), and that God often reveals profound truths to (spiritual) “young children”. You point out that you prefer to be among such young ones that Jesus spoke of. So, are you claiming that God is revealing to you great truths and hence we should listen to you rather than the (correct, in this case) views of the Greek/Hebrew experts? In a similar vein, while discussing the allegation of Billybari8081’s use of the “Appeal to Popularity” fallacy, you place yourself alongside the ancient prophets “How many of the prophets that God sent to warn His people of wrong-doing were in the majority? The majority is usually wrong. Jesus tells us to avoid the majority…Matt 7:13” But you have conceded that the majority, in this case, are correct ** Strawman argument “The commenter (Billybari8081) misrepresents my argument by suggesting that I believe I’m the only Bible scholar who understands translation better than all the rest. This is not the case. In fact, I don’t consider myself to be a Bible scholar. I’d rather be that young child Jesus spoke of.” A “strawman” argument involves deliberately distorting or even replacing the other person's argument and then attacking the distorted, easy-to-refute version of the argument instead of refuting the original point. Although (sadly) sarcastic, Billybari8081 does not really misrepresent your position. True, you do not claim to be a Greek/Hebrew scholar, but you appear to believe that the opinions of the world’s leading scholars on Greek/Hebrew translation count as little compared to the hidden truths God has revealed to the spiritual “young child” that you appear to be claiming to be. ** Ad hominem fallacy “The speaker (Billybari8081) questions my credibility by implying that [it] is unreasonable to believe that Eric understands translation better than all the other scholars” An ad hominem fallacy is when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position (on Isa 9:6 in this case), you attack some irrelevant aspect of the person who is making the argument. Like me saying you are wrong because you were a JW or you have a beard, or anything else irrelevant to the discussion. Pointing out in the present context (Isa 9:6) that you are not an expert in Greek and Hebrew is not an ad hominem attack; it is simply a statement of relevant fact. A fact that you magnanimously conceded when you graciously acknowledged your error at the beginning of the video. Sincerely, Eric
If all of the great majority of experts agree on a subject, then the "appeal to popularity" fallacy still applies. The great majority of scientists agree that we evolved. So claiming we evolved and were not created is both an appeal to authority and an appeal to popularity." I disagree on the "appeal to authority" fallacy, because "he" wasn't addressing the argument. The opinions of the "world’s leading scholars on Greek/Hebrew translation" support the Trinity. If you believe in the Trinity, then you will agree with them and consider me to be in the wrong. If you don't believe in the Trinity then you will have invalidated your argument. On your last point, the ad hominem attack, I agree with you.
@@BeroeanPickets Hi Eric, many thanks for taking the time to reply. I dont know how you manage to reply to all the comments in all the threads, under all your videos!! Your point about evolution is well argued. Regarding Scripture, as most of us don’t know Biblical Greek and Hebrew, it is unavoidable that we have to depend on translators and the quality of their work. Yes, sometimes people’s beliefs influence their translations, sometimes the opposite is true - which should always be the case. The best we can do is to study and weigh their discussions on a given text. One thing I noticed when I searched for the discussion you referred to (with Billybari8081) under your recent “Prayer” videos was that neither of you, as I can recall, referred to Isa 10:21 which could have shed some light on the meaning of Isa 9:6. To develop a point that you made, Scripture often (helps) interpret Scripture. My penny’s worth. Best Regards, The other Eric
It is also good to know that according to reference sources, GREEK WAS WRITTEN IN ALL CAPS! Ancient Hebrew on the other hand was always written in small print.
I’m suggesting we hesitate when using the word “God.” It’s not a name, nor an identity. It causes much confusion about the identity of the “Father” and the “Son” and the “Word.” God is a “type.” But it does not tell us who one is talking about per se, unless qualified with identity. For example, God the Father is clear, God the Son is clear, and God the Word is clear per John 1:1. I won’t continue to expound upon the support for these because to do so would require much space. But I will say there is One God. Yet there are essential elements of that one God which we know even when God said “Let “us” make man in our image. (My quotations). I don’t accept that “The WORD” was a created being but was actually God himself, yet NOT “The Father.” Maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t see how to put a separation between the Word that was made flesh into Jesus from the one The Father used to create and make all things through. The Father sent his WORD into the human family to save them: the ultimate gift of love and mercy.
@@k.mcguillicutty5368 “God the Son” and “God the Word” are not scriptural titles of anyone. So what are you talking about? If you take “theos” at John 1:1c to be definite, i.e., “God” as opposed to indefinite “a god” then John 1:1 is teaching Modalism since it would be identifying the Logos as the “ton theon/the God” he was with, which was the Father. Are you a Modalist?
This was an amazing explanation of that person‘s concern or interest in whether Isaiah 96 was referring to God, Almighty, Jehovah or Jesus as a God, a divine one. I had my Bible out and followed along with you and soon as I saw in the New World translation, that Verse six also says Prince of peace, letters and eternal, father and uppercase it made sense that this translation would also put mighty God in uppercase letters showing the title that they was given. Excellent coverage and I’m going to listen to this again more thoroughly. Thank you for taking the time to give us all some insight on that topic. May Jehovah continue to bless you.
Truth is not easy. First Corinthians, 4 verse 5. When Jesus? comes will get the truth. Because nobody has the truth today, the real salvation. How God's gonna fix all this.
This was a through discussion in clarifying your critic's complaint! 💯PS: Note that Isaiah 9:6 "Is not present in LXX source. These words only appear in the Hebrew text and were not quoted by Early Christians until after 325 AD. It’s a real mystery how these words got into the Hebrew text." See 2001 Translation
@rizalitosantos3411- If you look in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, Isaiah 9:6 says nothing about Mighty God or Eternal Father. It looks like that was added in the Masoretic text that Protestant Bibles use.
I found this video to be fascinating!! It has given me so much information to digest. I wish more people from the various church's were willing to question and examine the things they have been taught in light of the Bible. I think many people are starting to see the church's have failed miserably in following Jesus Christ. I look forward to your next video.
Anthony Buzzard is a Socinian. Socinians don’t believe in the preexistence of Christ just FYI. Interesting though is how the LXX renders “mighty God”, it reads, “Angel of Great Counsel”.
Thank you for sharing this information, clearly said, Jesus christ is considered to the lamb, and in the bible book Revelation, there is only one who can take the scroll out of the hand of the one seated on the throne, no one else was worthy to open the seals of the scroll, only the lamb is worthy to open the seals of the scroll, thank you Eric, well done video,
Really enjoyed Jesus’s reaction to how some reacted to the truths he was revealing. It was like a ah huh moment. Why wasn’t Jehovah opening the eyes of these peoples to the truth? Matt 11 :25 He publicly praised his father for hiding these pearls of truth from certain ones. He now really understood. So it is a relief to know some people cannot be convinced of certain truths no matter how hard you try. It’s no longer frustrating.
II am grateful that I have learned a lot from this video, clearly explained based on Bible, not based on human reasoning or academic knowledge of Hebrew texts. Bible warns us to be wary of worldly wise people. "God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise."( 1Corinthians 1:27 NIV). When Jesus was asked about the sign of the end of the age, the first thing he said was not an increase in wars and wickedness, but to watch out that no one deceives you, for many will come in my name (Matthew 24:4-14 NIV).
@otomeyama- Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this important subject! The Bible warns us over and over not to be deceived. That is Eric's purpose as brother in Christ. He never relies on dogma and the men who preach it.
Спасиба брат Ерик за твое експлэнэшын Гад Блэс ю энд её эти бразэ каторый вы месте работаите Гад блэс ю энд аназэ бразэ Ехова и Исус Кристос. Лавю.❤❤❤❤❤❤
@@maryj7045 says, "Thank you brother Erik for your explanation Gad Bless you and her these braze katoriy you place work Gad bless you and anaze braze Jehovah and Jesus Christ. Love.❤❤❤❤❤❤" P.S. I don't understand some of the words. Maybe Google Translate will improve later. :)
So first your argument was God the Father is the almighty and Jesus is only Mighty, now you’re saying Jehovah is both the mighty and also the almighty. Which is it!? 😂
Awesome video Eric, been watching your videos for the past month, i am a Df Jw and while agree with about 75-80% of JW biblical doctrines i feel hesitant to return due some scriptural reasons plus the governing body acting like they rule over us and we have to agree with them whenever they make a change. So now im just searching for truth Asking Jehovah Almost everyday for it and trying to build a relationship with Jehovah God with out a organization or a group of men, im not saying its bad worshipping in a group/organization , but i want to come to my own conclusions With the help of the holy spirit about the Biblical truth that leads me closer to Jah God; & his Son Jesus Christ. Thanks again eric for this video
Ne retournez pas chez la wachtower ils ont dévié complètement du christianisme, Éric a un très bon enseignement sur les écritures je le suis depuis la France au moins je ne suis pas seul . Que Dieu vous bénisse dans vos recherches de la vraie vérité ❤
The Samaritan woman at he well with Jesus had the same problem, she had doubts Jerusalem or Gerizim where should I worship. We are to worship God in spirit and truth. John 4.23-24.…23But a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father is seeking such as these to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and His worshipers must worship Him in spirit and in truth.” 25The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When He comes, He will explain everything to us.”… Organised religions are designed to be confusing and divisive and people move away from them but also take their faith away. but remember Gods word is always true. The confusion is designed to keep us from the truth.
Excellent video thanks Eric… Isiah 48. 7 to open the eyes of the blind, to bring prisoners out of the dungeon and those sitting in darkness out from the prison house. 8I am the LORD; that is My name! (I will not yield My glory to another ) or My praise to idols. 9Behold, the former things have happened, and now I declare new things. Before they spring forth I proclaim them to you.”…
Hi there. Are we even sure Isaiah chapter 9 verse 6 belongs in the Bible? I suspect this verse is a FORGERY. The masoretic version of this verse is completely different from the Septuagint manuscript. Which does not make any mention of "eternal father" or "mighty God". Also, did any of the writers of the new testament ever quote this verse? It would be weird if they didn't use this text to verify Yeshua as the Messiah if it was authentic. Brenton's Septuagint Translation version says "For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him." Do you see the problem here? NOTE: haven't watched the full video yet so maybe you already brought this up
So, in your opinion, who is Jesus if he is not God the son, one person of the trinity? Is he "a" god? Do we have two gods or even more? Is he a created beeing? Is he an angel? You say he is divine. Angels are not divine. Only God is divine. Please guve an explanation. Greatings from Germany
Hebrew 1,5 F o r t o w h i c h o f t h e a n g e l s d i d H e e v e r s a y: “ Y o u a r e M y S o n , T o d a y I h a v e b e g o t t e n Y o u ” ? And again: “ I w i l l b e t o H i m a F a t h e r , A n d H e s h a l l b e t o M e a S o n ”?
Jesus bore the divine name, just like many people and angels before him. Didn't make him Jehovah. But it's pretty clear why the church decided on making him so. I agree with scholars like Bart Ehrman and Dan McClellan who say Jesus never claimed to be the God of Israel but the doctrine of the Trinity tied up a lot of messy details.
@@cygnustsp The Roman Emperor Constantine desired unity among his subjects, Christians, Jews, and the multi-god pagan Romans among others. The Trinity was thus mandated in the 3rd century under his political rule. Trinity is really a politically mandated belief, not a scriptural teaching taught by Christ nor his apostles, Just as Paul warned. Acts 20:29
@@marianna280 Angels are “elohim” or “gods”.-Ps. 8:5 In fact they are specifically referred to as “divine” in Ps. 82:1 which says, “God presides in the divine assembly; He renders judgment among the gods”. So I’m not sure who taught you angels were not divine but they obviously don’t know what they are talking about.
I saw the response to my comment.I would like that you address the topic in your program.I would also refer you to Thomas in John 20 v 28(My Lord and my God). Is Thomas violating Exodus 20 v 7?
@edwardmctaggart6841- Perhaps you are mistaken to think that Thomas is calling Jesus God. The context of the verse is something to consider. You might find some insight by reading about this at: trinitydelusion.org/john-2028/
Thank you for your research, Eric. I especially thank you for the thought about Jesus becoming the "step-father" when Adam lost his fatherhood to us and other great not often heard, yet important thoughs. I agree with majority of the video, but the end is confusing to me and does not clarify to me the two previous prayer vids yet. As I see, the praying to Jesus question moved to one issue only. Who is the God? As you greatly pointed out, the names or I would say "titles"(as each name includes some role or authority of the bearer) in Is 9:6 are not a nature or mere descriptions (capitals), but unique names/titles. To add to your argument, we can see the tense used... his name "will be". If someone will be a "Mighty God" and "Eternal Father", clearly he is NOT at the time, the verse is written. So clearly if Jesus was NOT a "Mighty God" within lifetime of Isiah, he is NOT the God-father, not the trinity. I see one important point here. Throughout the bible and especially when Jesus came to earth and when he was resurrected many important titles of high authority changed bearer. Jesus was given title from YHWH like owner and shepherd of the sheep, king, saviour, gatherer, judge, etc... titles YHWH used under the chosen nation of Israel. When you read the verse from Mat 11:25, this changed too within 3 years in Mat 28:18. So we can see that titles often move from a person to person. Even in the case of YHWH and his son Jesus. One of the main surprise to me when I woke up and read the bible again, is that even the name God is just a title. The problem is that we view it, due indoctrination, as a description of a nature of YHWH and our father. Not it is a mere title with authority with certain scope. Like your example with satan. You explained greatly when and why Jesus receives the title Eternal Father. I miss when and why he receives the Mighty God and explanation what authority that title has. There is much to say to it, but Rev 21:5-7 is in fact a fulfilment of the Is 9:6 prophesy. The last titles Jesus receives from his father. (Jesus is the only one who gives commands to John "write" through out book of Rev; He is A&O - Rev 22:13; Jesus is the only one who gives water of life; etc). So it is why I cannot be in the camp of Trinitarians nor in the camp - Jesus is not God. Jesus inherited this title as was prophesied. Yet, it does not make hime the same person as his father. Nor higher. Yet bible clearly teaches, he will have this title and was revealed he has it. So the prayer question remains. Should the prayer be directed exclusively to "YHWH" or to any bearer of the title God, so to his son included? In my view it is not the "word" itself, it is the topic we pray for makes the difference. If we pray in way of worshiping it belongs to YHWH only, if we pray for help and other stuff (John 14:14, 2.Cor12:8) that belong under authority of Jesus's titles we might direct our prayer/askes,/begs/calls to him. So, we should be very careful and never pray to Jesus in a way that would make our heart or our listeners confused about clear status, roles, titles and names belonging to YHWH and Jesus. That is my view.
@@vintage6346 Just do not get stick to the word "pray". In John 14:14 Jesus openly said, we should "ask" directly him for anything. He did not said ask father, or ask father through me. No he said "ask me". And Paul did it 3 times as recorded in Bible account. So I can grant you not calling the "process" praying, yet still 1st century christians did ask Jesus and we can too.
@victorlegret9036 "Prayer" is what we are talking about! Biblehub lists many versions that say "And whatever you ask in my name,...". As if you didn't know this?
@@vitisbp1131 As majority of bibles are translated with bias as these translators were members of denominations, no serious bible student should base conclusions on "variations" unless these are rooted in the original language. Even the JW's interlinear admits there is "ask me".
You ask at 6:07 "God has a nature?" and your answer is: "No, he doesn't...." Is that a misstatement? Or an attempt at a joke or irony or sarcasm? If so, please explain. Or do you believe that God, Jehovah, Yahweh, YHWH does not have a "nature" that He doesn't have characteristics or dispositions or ways of thinking, that He doesn't have a personality?
@johndoe-n3b1v Those using the argument that Jesus is God base their reasoning on the belief that Jesus shares the nature of God Almighty, the Father. In insisting on that premise, they are not referring to his character nor way of thinking, but to his substance, because they illustrate what they mean by using the nature of a human. It goes like this: "I am a human, My father was a human, but I am different from my father yet we are both human. We have the same nature." I get into that in detail in the previous video of this series which I'm assuming you haven't seen otherwise you wouldn't have misunderstood my premise. If you like, you can view it here: beroeans.net/articles/what-really-wrong-about-praying-jesus
Nice job Eric. The only thing I would challenge you on is your argument that God does not have a nature. God is spirit and is “a spirit”. Thus he exists as a spirit person or being separate and distinct from all other spirits or gods/angels. There are two forms of ontology according to scripture.-1 Cor. 15 The spiritual and the physical. Ontology deals with state of being or nature. Philippians 2 teaches us that Jesus existed in the form of “theos” or “God/a god”. In other words he shared the same nature as God, namely the nature of existing as a spirit. This also suggests spirit beings have a tangible form. What “comes from spirit is spirit”. God is the only unbegotten/uncreated spirit but this does not preclude him from having the nature of a spirit. Remember “nature” can be defined as: “the inherent character or basic constitution” or as “a kind or class usually distinguished by fundamental or essential characteristics” God is a certain kind of being. Beings exist and by necessity have a particular type of nature.
@elikSW15 Sorry, I read your comment wrong so I’m editing mine. “Created” and “born” or “begotten” are synonymous in scripture. Read Prov. 8:22-27 What’s born from spirit is spirt. Likewise what’s born from flesh is flesh. Jesus existed in the form of “God or a god”. But he’s an “only begotten god” so their nature was similar but not exact. However, that being said, now Heb. 1:3 says Christ is “the exact representation of God’s nature” or “being”. So at this point in time they are as close in nature as two persons could possibly be. But the word “charaktar” or “representation” signals the idea of the imprint in a wax seal left by a signet ring. Images and representations may be exact copies but you can’t transfer eternal existence from eternity past to a copy. That’s just ridiculous.
@@unletteredandordinary Dziękuję za odpowiedź. Napisałeś, że ich natura jest tak bliska jak to możliwe. No właśnie. Jednak zrodzenie jest jedyną w swoim rodzaju formą powołania do istnienia . Jeśli człowiek ma syna to nie jest on niższej ''natury'' niż ojciec . Więc jeśli Bóg wieczny, zechciał mieć swojego Syna na swój obraz to czemu część wierzących nie chce uznać boskości Syna? Czemu upiera się, że Syn nie jest taki jak Ojciec? W końcu czyta w naszych myślach tak jak Ojciec. Daje życie, sądzi, zmartwychwzbudza, itd. Czy aniołowie maja takie możliwości? Więc czy jest tylko aniołem? Nie może być. Co znaczy ,że jest jednorodzonym Synem , Jednorodzonym Bogiem (bogiem?) ? To , że jest Bogiem ( bogiem), wcale nie znaczy , że jest Tym Bogiem (JHWH), bo jest Synem Boga . Co sądzisz ?
@@unletteredandordinaryOczywiście Syn miał początek i nie jest od wieczności. Zaistniał. Dzięki Bogu, który w tym momencie stał się Ojcem . Dał życie synowi . Ci co mówią że syn był od wieczności mylą się
@elikSW15 Like I said to “beget” and to “create” are synonymous in the Bible. They are used in parallel at Prov. 8:22-25 note: “The LORD created me as His first course,c before His works of old. 23From everlasting I was established, from the beginning, before the earth began. 24When there were no watery depths, I was brought forth, when no springs were overflowing with water. 25Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I was brought forth, So first of all verse 22 used the word “create” to describe the process by which Christ came into existence and then continues to refer to that act of creation as bringing forth (with labor pains) or begetting. Likewise at Ps. 90:2 we see the word “born” is once again used to mean “create”. Notice: “Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the whole world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God” Were the mountains “born” or were they “created”? Exactly. So the two words, “born” and “create” are synonymous. How did God “create” or “beget” his sons? Well that’s a metaphysical question that no one can truly answer with any real understanding. All we know is that “all things came out of the Father”.-1 Cor. 8:6 Justin Martyr likens it to a fire lighting another fire. The initial fire isn’t diminished from the creation of the other fire. But one definitely preceded the other and shares the nature of the one that “lit” it. So I don’t know why people object to Christ’s divinity? If I were to guess I’d say it’s partly because they just don’t know what the Bible says on the topic or they are overcompensating as a defense mechanism against the Trinity doctrine. But Jesus is a “son of God” and therefore “a god”. If God called “gods” those to whom the word of God came (the angelic sons of God who presided over the nations), and the Scripture cannot be broken” like Jesus clearly told the Jewish religious leaders then who are we to contradict him? Even Moses was made “God to Pharaoh” and to Aaron. I understand that this was strictly in a functional sense though. Moses did not share in the nature of “theos” nor was he created or made an immortal “life-giving spirit”. Jesus was though and so can rightly be viewed as a “divine being” but then so can God’s other sons. They just have not been given life in themselves or immortality.-John 5:26
High Likelyhood! "Missing from every ancient Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, Slavic, Georgian, Coptic, and Arabic manuscript. Did not appear in any Greek manuscript of the Bible until the 14th or 15th century - approximately 1,400 years after the Apostle wrote this Bible book." See 2001 translation comments
Eric you said Jesus never claimed to be God true verbatim, but by making the claim in Jn. 8;58 "Most assuredly I say to you before Abraham was I AM". Is that not a claim that He is God? secondly There is only one true God, we agree, then you said satan was a mighty god, and Jesus is a mighty god. Did Almighty God create other gods? I don't believe so. The other god's you referred to in 1 cor. were not true god's there, they were man made god's, there is only one true God. Thus either the Lord Jesus Christ is one with the Father or you move into a doctrinal error by saying there are two gods similar to the JW's teaching Jehovah Almighty God and Jesus a god.
Very true. if Jesus is not God then he is a created being and christians would be guilty of idolatry.Only God is perfect and again and again scripture states that God is the only saviour.It seems that Eric still believes the JW lies.
@@edwardmctaggart6841 I'm a former JW , I was born again, in 1983, the marking point of my conversion came when I embraced the true identity of Jesus Christ. I am very glad for the ministries that help JW's see the error in there organization however there is still that God shaped vaccum that can only the indwelling presence of Christ can fill . God Bless.
Cher ami, je voudrais que vous transmettiez mes sincères condoléances à la famille de monsieur Penton, qui a été une personne formidable et courageuse 😢
Hi Eric. I watch your videos but im not a follower. You say the knowledge does not come from intellectual prowess but from insiration. So, are you receiving that inspiration?
That is not what I said, @marcbrady5898. I said: "Because this truth is gained not by intellectual prowess, but because it is revealed to us by God." I then explained what that meant by quoting from Matthew 16:13-17. Particularly verse 17 where "Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven." There is a difference between being inspired and being led by the spirit to truth. Jesus tells us: “. . .However, when that one comes, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come.” (John 16:13) and John further clarifies by writing: "As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit-just as it has taught you, remain in him." (1 John 2:27) What all that means is that if you try to understand scripture without opening your heart to God's holy spirit, then you will end up being guided by a different spirit, that of the world which lies in the power of Satan. Fleshly thinking versus Spiritual thinking. The spirit of the flesh, versus the Spirit of God.
My technique for answering Isaiah 9:6 is the same one Jesus used in John 10:33-35 when he answered the Pharisees' belief that Jesus made himself God. Well, I accept that the Bible calls Jesus God, but that does not mean that He is the almighty God because in Genesis 32:24-28, 30 and Judges 13:21, 22 also calls the angels God. This shuts them up without having to enter into the sterile debate or struggle about whether Jesus is God or not.
@reynaldorey2020 - The only issue with that is that any given angel would never be address as God, or called God. An angel could be called a god. Do you see the difference?
@@BeroeanPickets No, Eric. That is a question of semantics, since neither in the original Hebrew nor in the original Greek were letters capitalized. With these examples, I did not say that Jesus is an angel, which I do not believe he is, but that even an angel can be called God. Did you read the biblical accounts?
@@reynaldorey2020 Not semantics but grammar. In Greek, "God" is rendered "THE GOD" and "a god" is rendered "GOD". The definite article is used to distinguish God Almighty from any other god, good or bad. So in Greek, an angel is not called God (ho theos, THE GOD) but instead he would be called simply (a god, theos). Remember, there is no indefinite article in Greek. So to say in English that Jesus is God, but not God Almighty is a contradiction in terms, because God (ho theos, THE GOD) is almighty and every other god (theos, GOD) is not.
@@BeroeanPickets I agree with that, I have used that same line of discussion many times and it does not work to convince a Trinitarian because fanaticism blinds them. We must accept that the Bible with or without the article, capitalized or uncapitalized, the Bible calls our Lord Jesus Christ “God.” Denying that is what sparks the discussion with Trinitarians. I find it effective to shuts them up with another line of debate, the one used by Jesus.
But this example given by author isn’t correct cos even though the Bible says that God has anointed us with his Spirit it never calls us „christs” (anointed ones). In the NT this title belongs only to Jesus. Those who are anointed with the Spirit are called „Christianos” - not Christos - which means „the one who belongs to Christ” (the one who belongs to the anointed one). These are two different things (even if the root word is the same) and the Bible is very precise about that. The rest are just the assumptions and suggestions imposed by people who want to prove their theories.
Why do you insist that God should fit into human understanding? For His thoughts and ways are higher than ours. Sounds like you’ve held on to some JW doctrines even after finding their faults.
There is no teeth to your comment. At what point was any insisting going on? And how do you arrive at your perception of any of this? What do you actually know about people's relationships with their heavenly Father? Please do expound. I would love to hear this. Sincerely. You comment is so vague, I'm having a hard time giving it any credibility. Thank you.
@@kariberger4978 Sure, @14:30 “How can Jesus be brother and father at the same time? He can’t.” His insisting here. He can because The LORD is one. I don’t know anything but only whatever they speak about. Eric has held on to Arianism even after discovering the JW org is a false prophet. But with everything take it to your secret place, ask Him yourself. 1 John 2:27. May His spirit lead you to all truths 🙏
@@emanuel31323ok so by you're saying that Jesus is God when clearly the number of scriptures in the bible stating otherwise....is this not yourself insisting? I see Eric's comment as a logical conclusion. There are no dogmatic undertones whatsoever.
@@kariberger4978 Bummer. It is absolutely a dogmatic statement. No undertone needed. But because it aligns with your perception you don’t see it. But like I said, pray about it. Ask The Father yourself. He is a rewarded if those who seek Him diligently. Don’t take any person’s word for it, but test every spirit.
Thanks, Eric, another clear, Biblical explanation. The Trinity was one of the first things I studied over my 10 year awakening process, using even Trinitarian-biased translations, and it just never made sense to me. But the fact it didn’t make sense wouldn't have mattered IF the Bible teaches it... but nowhere in the Bible is the Trinity to be found. What you said towards the end makes perfect sense... they can't see it because the Father has not revealed it to them. Thank you for your clear teaching. You interpret nothing: you kust let the Bible speak for itself and you tell it how it is. Thats a humble teacher ❤🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Well, I did such study and found that at least Jesus is Deity. Can we discuss this subject cos I wonder how the scriptures teaches something else. Jesus is Deity. How do you understand Rev 5:8-14?
@koz2270 I'm no scholar, but I like to let the Bible speak for itself. I think you may be referring specifically to the portion in Revelation 5:13 where it says "And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, 'To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honour and glory and might for ever and ever!' " ESV. I've heard trinitarians use this to say "see, every creature in heaven, Jesus is in heaven, therefore he is not a creature, and must be the uncreated God." On the surface, it may seem plausible, but any conclusions we come to from a verse must harmonise with all of Scripture. And I happen to agree with what Eric said about Jesus being begotten by God in his video series dealing with the Trinity, and that God exists outside of space and time, while we exist within it. Angels also exist in it. The Word, or Logos, was begotten by God and can enter into creation, and he can also be with God. As God begat him before the creation of the physical universe , the Logos also existed before time itself, and is therefore eternal like God. Without time, there can be no beginning. No ending. Makes perfect sense and fits with what is said of Christ in Philippians and Colossians etc. The Bible tells us Jesus is God's only begotten Son, John 3:16, the Greek mo•no•ge•nes`, means unique, one of a kind. So he is unique, but he is the Son of God, not God himself. Jesus is no mere angel, certainly not Michael the archangel, but he is not the Almighty. That's how I understand it 🤗
@JonParente I see, I think I need to go and watch all the said about Trinity. I admit I haven't watch all his content on that subject. The point you made about Jesus eternality is true. Traditional trinitarian doctrine does not teach that Jesus is the same person as God, only that he shares the same essence as God. I think what I had in mind in rev 5:8-14 is worship given to Jesus. Worship makes one a Deity. I am not a scholar either, but I did my personal research on this subject and concluded that Trinity for the most part is the only way we can correctly synthesize what the scriptures say about God. If we say only God the father has such divine essence, and is worshipped, we have many scriptures to contend with, one of them is rev 5. I like to start from verse 8 since the worshipful praise started from there.
@koz2270 ah, I see. Not putting Eric on a pedestal, but I liked the way he brought out what the Scriptures say about worship. Because I've come away from the Jehovah’s Witnesses cult, I'm very careful now to believe only what's in the Bible. What doesn't help is that we're all reliant on translations in our own languages, and Eric beautifully highlighted the words translated as "worship" in a lot of Bibles. For example, the NEB uses "pay him homage" in Hebrews 1:6 (interesting that it's God who says that about the Son, so it's the Father who commanded the angels to pay him homage or worship). In Revelation 5:8 though, the NEB says "worship". I'm still learning, and have a lot to learn. I love that Eric gives Jesus his due honor, whereas cults like the Jehovah’s Witnesses demote him to an angel 🫣 Jesus also said about Jehovah that "he has committed all the judging to the Son, in order that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He that does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." John 5:22, 23 So if any worship (proskuneo) is directed to the Son, its at the Father's direction and to his glory.
Nice video, Eric. And don’t get mad when people ask you questions in the comments. Many of us want to know more and argue to find the truth. With this said I have a question. How is the Son an Eternal Father? I think the word Father is clear from what you exposed in the video. But how is he an Eternal Father? It seems to me that his title of Father is contingent to actions in time, yet to happen. Hence, how is he “eternal” in this context?
My understanding is that as the last Adam, he becomes the father of all those humans who are saved through their repentance under the kingdom of God. I'm referrring to those who will be judged in the second resurrection. Those who become his children, who will never die, means that he will always be a father to them.
tam w tekście hebrajskim interlinearnym , nie ma , że jest ojcem wiecznym ! Tam jest : '' Ojcem na wieki'' . A to jest duża różnica. Też kiedyś zmyliło to mnie. Ale mam tekst dosłowny i sprawdziłam. Więc OJCIEC NA WIEKI , bo tak będzie .
1 Cor 8, 5And although there are some who are called ‘gods’ (whether heavenly or earthly, for there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’), 6we only have one God -the Father- from whom everything came, and we’re in Him. There’s also just one Lord, Jesus the Anointed; everything is in his hand, and we are in his hand too. (No where in scripture is Jesus called God almighty. Not even in the book of Isaiah.)
@clintfitzpatrick266 - Well said and if we look at the Septuagint, we will see that Isaiah 6:9 doesn't even contain the words "Mighty God" or "Eternal Father." 9:6 From the Septuagint Isaiah 9:6 --"For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him." There are many things that the Masoretic text has added.
ONCTION DE L ESPRIT SAINT : COMMENT ? PREUVES ? ***(1 Jean **2:20**-21) [...] vous avez une onction [qui vient] du saint ; tous, vous avez la connaissance. 21 Je vous écris, non parce que vous ne connaissez pas la vérité, mais parce que vous la connaissez, et parce qu’aucun mensonge ne vient de la vérité.*** ---qui est véritablement Oint ? ou choisi ? pour faire partie des 144000 aux cieux ? ---qui est véritablement 'Oint' ? ou 'choisi' ? pour faire partie de "la grande foule" des "autres brebis" de YHWH et de JC ? ***(Révélation 14:1-5) 14 Et j’ai vu, et regardez ! l’Agneau qui se tenait debout sur le mont Sion, et avec lui cent quarante-quatre mille ayant son nom et le nom de son Père écrits sur leurs fronts. 2 Et j’ai entendu un bruit venant du ciel, comme le bruit des eaux nombreuses et comme le bruit d’un fort tonnerre ; et le bruit que j’ai entendu était comme celui de chanteurs qui s’accompagnent de la harpe, jouant sur leurs harpes. 3 Et ils chantent comme un chant nouveau devant le trône et devant les quatre créatures vivantes et les anciens ; et personne n’était capable d’apprendre ce chant à fond, sauf les cent quarante-quatre mille, qui ont été achetés de la terre. 4 Ce sont ceux qui ne se sont pas souillés avec des femmes ; en fait, ils sont vierges. Ce sont ceux qui continuent à suivre l’Agneau où qu’il aille. Ceux-ci ont été achetés d’entre les humains comme prémices pour Dieu et pour l’Agneau, 5 et on n’a pas trouvé de mensonge dans leur bouche ; ils sont sans tache.*** ---avez-vous des preuves ou des témoignages à apporter? ---qui est véritablement "oint" ou choisi par YHWH et JC, pour faire partie du peuple du vrai Dieu, peuple qui vivra sur la terre, dans le monde nouveau promis en compagnie des réssuscités? Cf. ***(Jean **6:44**-47) 44 Personne ne peut venir vers moi, si le Père, qui m’a envoyé, ne l’attire ; et je le ressusciterai au dernier jour. 45 Il est écrit dans les Prophètes : ‘ Et ils seront tous enseignés par Jéhovah. ’ Tout homme qui a entendu [ce qui vient] du Père et a appris vient vers moi. 46 Non que quelque homme ait vu le Père, excepté celui qui vient de Dieu ; celui-ci a vu le Père. 47 Oui, vraiment, je vous le dis : Celui qui croit a la vie éternelle.*** Cf. ***(Jean 6:64, 65) [...] . 65 Alors il dit encore : “ Voilà pourquoi je vous ai dit : Personne ne peut venir vers moi si cela ne lui est pas accordé par le Père. ”***
Ok. I know Jesus is not God because it does not make sence, but what does it mean to say that Jesus is divine?? If Jesus is divine but not God then what does it mean to be divine? In other words what is the definition of divine and how does it apply to Jesus. Thank you
I have to remind myself that not one word of English was ever in the Hebrew or Greek scriptures. Thus we must do the best in their translation. For example, we might say that Devil's food cake is divine. Translation into English, or other languages can be difficult in getting the original spirit. I find it somewhat helpful to look up the etymology of words. For example, "Divine: late Middle English: via Old French from Latin divinus, from divus ‘godlike’ (related to deus ‘god’)."
Just because Hebrew has no capital letters doesn’t mean Jesus is not God. Also who do you say Jesus is and who is the Holy Spirit . Micah 5:1 says Jesus goings forth are from long ago . A description of God. Nasb By the way I am a Christian not a jw. Furthermore in John 1:1 “a” is not in the original Greek. There is much more that can be said about that but for times sake if you really believed an a should be inserted then why not in vs 6 and 13, how about vs 18, does it say God or a God?
The first Christians did not believe in the Trinity. By looking carefully how the believe in the Trinity originated, you can only conclude that it's rooted in pagan religion!
@KenCorulla - In John 1:6, the same God who sent Jesus, sent John. In verse 12, are we God's children or Jesus' children? In 13, are we born of God, or of Jesus? In verse 18, he is called the only-begotten Son of God. Oh, and you do know, don't you that there is no "a" or "an" in Greek, so proper translation requires us to insert the indefinite article to comply with English grammar.
@@BeroeanPickets good day sir. Please I have an issue that I'm facing with a jw and it about spiritual gift they believe it gone forever because of 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 . Because of that completeness They is no longer any spiritual gift. Please how can I handle this . Thank you sir .
I hope we agree that the prophesy in Isaiah 9:5 refers to the human being Jesus, born through Mary two thousand years ago, whom Mary was to give the name Jesus (Jehoshua = I Am The Savior) according to Divine Providence. (Luke 1,30-35)
Regarding whom and when, did the following prophecies quoted by Paul in his famous letter to the Hebrews be fulfilled? # Hebrew 1,5 F o r t o w h i c h o f t h e a n g e l s d i d H e e v e r s a y: “ Y o u a r e M y S o n , T o d a y I h a v e b e g o t t e n Y o u ” ? And again: “ I w i l l b e t o H i m a F a t h e r , A n d H e s h a l l b e t o M e a S o n ”?
Are we not ALL of God? "In the beginning, was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." John 1:1. Is it so hard to believe that God is capable of being anything and everything he wishes? God is the Holy Spirit, God is the Father, and God is the Son. God became the Father, when the Word became Jesus on earth. They are three, but one from the beginning. Jesus said, "I and the Father are one." John 10:30. They are one in unity, but in the beginning were one having never been separated until Jesus was born on the earth.
@ I respect your beliefs as well. The trinity is just what people call it. It is a man made doctrine. I believe God is all and in all. Without him, we are nothing. For me, it's not about believing God is three in one. It's about believing God is everything, almighty and has the power to be whatever he desires. I'm not arguing with you. Nor do I feel it is worth arguing about. In the end, he will reveal to us what he chooses to reveal. Our purpose is to believe and honor him. Too many times people get caught up in the idea of being right, and all we have is our own human perception. Holy Spirit can and will guide us but we should never assert that we have all the answers. Much respect to you Eric, for being a whistle blower for Christ! I was a JW, born in. Spent 43 years in the lies. Now being lead by Holy Spirit and it is so refreshing.
Kjs, God has revealed to us that he had an only begotten son long before that son came to the earth. A son and his father are two separate entities. Jesus and Jehovah have always been two separate entities.
Please Pray Research and Read the World English Bible with Apocrypha May the Most High YAH Bless us through Yeshua Christ the Messiah the Way the Truth and Eternal life!
Isaiah, 62:1-3, theres no other organization or religion which fulfilled these prophecy, Jehovah's new Spiritual Jeruzalem will be called by The NEW Name of God, Jehovah,
Another falsehood in WT is saying Christ is mighty but God is greater as he is almighty. But they are entirely different Hebrew words. It is only the translation into English that gives the false comparison of one greater than the other. So our reasoning needs to be sound, not convenient
Im not attacking you in anyway and have much respect for you. However, the argument is too complicated for a very clear and straight forward verse. Often times the simplest answer is the correct one.
"On l’appellera Conseiller merveilleux, Dieu fort, Père éternel, Prince de paix" C'est une expression connue à l'époque de l'antiquité et qui servait à qualifier les souverains Assyriens. Oui c'est ce qu'on appelle une TITULATURE des empereurs Assyriens. Mais Isaïe détourne cette TITULATURE IMPÉRIALE Assyrienne pour qualifier le futur Messie. Ainsi il lui donne une STATURE impériale dans l'esprit de ses lecteurs de son époque. Malheureusement, à notre époque, étant donné que les lecteurs de la Bible ne savent pas que le prophète Isaïe utilise ici une TITULATURE impériale Assyrienne, se retrouvent complètement perdus pour comprendre ce que signifie ce passage. Du coup beaucoup de gens interprétent très mal ce verset. ~ non ce verset n'indique pas que Jésus est "Le Dieu fort" (ou "Dieu tout puissant" comme le traduisent certaines versions) ~ ce passage n'indique pas non plus que Jésus est "le Père éternel" c'est-à-dire Dieu le Père Mais dès qu'on a en tête que c'est une TITULATURE impériale Assyrienne on peut rechercher ce que signifiait cette TITULATURE IMPÉRIALE àl'époquede l'antiquité, (en plus de donner une STATURE impériale): ~ Le roi/ empereur Assyrien était considéré comme "un dieu" parmis de nombreux dieux, et non comme "Le Dieu unique d'Israël" ~ Le roi / empereur Assyrien était qualifié de "Père éternel" en tant que fonction paternelle protectrice du peuple Assyrien, et non comme étant Dieu le Père, Le Dieu d'Israël. D'autre part, il faut quand même noter qu'à la fin du verset 8 il est expressément spécifié que c'est grâce au zel de JÉHOVAH, Le Dieu d'Israël, que ce futur roi/ empereur messianique obtiendra cette position. Donc il y a bien deux personnes distinctes. ■■■■■■■■■■■■
The true meaning of Christianity returns, not JC personally. It starts with- The proper understanding that biblical creation is of spiritual nature, not material nature has been discovered. Biblical creation is metaphors for psychological factors not material and is the creation of Adam. THE SECOND COMING OF CHRISTIANITY. (Basics) (sequence) I will send you Elijah before the great day of the lord.(the nut ball has arrived) 1 The entrance of Elijah the messenger. Embodied in the knowledge of the Old Seers. (The book of Rev. begins) 2 Christianity as present in the world is proven false. 3 The world falls into disbelief. 4 The world mostly takes on the new knowledge. 5 Governments are removed or become inert. 2 camps are created one good-the greater number falls away. 6 The good leave the cities, go into hiding for safety.3 7 End time arrives. The evil with no governance destroy their own kind. (by the hand of man will man's blood be shed)(the great day of the lord). 8 Proper Christianity remains. (natural man) 99
i am one who believes j e s u s to be a created being, from my investigation of the scriptures; but i feel its unwise to dismiss either a majority opinion, or intellectual data. there are thousands of interpretations of scripture, all claiming to be right. obviously none are, at least, not in totality. same reasoning applies to any who claim special knowledge or insight, in that no religion in today's age is breaking down all barriers as did c h r i s t i a n i t y in the first few centuries. if you are a m u s l i m, you are 99.9% certain to leave this life as one; same with every other major faith group. yes, some religions can increase, but that increase is mainly in its own major faith category. there are no present exceptions. the true people of God will be revealed during the great tribulation, as i see it. this isn't to say that we shouldn't prepare best we can, with those in whom we can have some confidence; but it is unwise to dismiss authority who has better access to data than we do. not to dismiss it outright, that's for sure. no one has absolute knowledge right now. no one. this is the problem that many have, that j w s have spouted for more than 100 years; that they have exclusive knowledge. they do not. the true people of God will be discovered during the great tribulation, most likely from every nation and faith system. we have to be ready, to stand with them, at that time.
I really wish people could see the clear truth of the nature of God and his son. It's not hard to understand the Father is God Almighty and created his son Jesus before all other things.
So why did the early Christians like the apostles and their followers teach Jesus was not created?. I thought Arianism is a Christian doctrine that is considered a heresy by modern mainstream Christianity.
Are you saying then that Jesus is not God? If you are (I hope not!) Then that would mean that you still believes the JW lies. John 8 v 24 : Unless you believe I AM he(the word he is an addition) you shall die in your sins. If Jesus is not God then Christians are guilty of idolatry.
@@edwardmctaggart6841 read the surrounding context of that verse. Jesus says he has a "Father" multiple times. Do you really believe God has a dad??? No where in chapter 8 does Jesus claim to be God. he only claims that he is the son of God. So when he says "I am he" it means that he is the SON OF GOD.
Eric, maybe I'm misunderstanding your point but the Hebrew text says יִּקְרָ֨א שְׁמ֜וֹ ֠his name will be called which signals that the descriptions that follow are names. The convention in English is to distinguish names by capitalization.
Dear Eric....More food for thought...Very Well Presented!
Thank you Eric for this video. I never thought about the sinner along side Jesus being saved at the very end of his life. He evidently did not live a Christian life but he repented at that time and was saved. It gives me hope for many people.
John 14:6
"I am the way, the truth, and the life!" Jesus answered. "Without me, no one can go to the Father. ❤
I like it when you asked: Who benefits from this confusion of equating Jesus to his Father Jehovah despite all the evidence that clearly shows that Jesus is the son of God? " This question is key to anyone genuinely seeking the truth from the Bible.
Thanks Eric. I like your explanations. Looking forward to working with due at some time in the near future. May Jehovah continue to bless you with knowledge which you would share to us.
@eric wilson; My deepest condolences on the oassing of Dr. James Penton, (27Apr1932-4Nov2024) May our Heavenly Father receive his ever-loved, respected and sacred soul. Thank you Eric for your interviews with Dr. Penton and his books.
@@pennybeeflower1951 who is as he?
Look for Eric's iinterviews with James Penton. He was a Watchtower objector/whistleblower @@Madman2024-
Thank you, Eric. The Holy Spirit explains Scriptures. John 14:6
Eric you are so correct.....some honest hearted ones just can't accept that they have it wrong. Humility is very much lacking in individuals sometimes. We have to humbly accept and change our thinking when the overwhelming evidence is presented.
Excellent and thought provoking video Eric. Science does not proceed by consensus. At one time, all serious scientists believed in a geocentric universe. Galileo and others (in the minority) said otherwise.
@@butziporsche8646
And with all the tools now avaiable, ridiculous claims continue. Galileo was punished for his intelligence and for stating truth.
There are also some alternate explanations and renditions. Jewish Bibles render it as:
""For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name; 'the prince of peace'". - Isaiah 9:5 (The Complete Tanach Version)
And some Christian scholars also argue this to be more accurate to the grammar, meaning the Messiah is only called "Prince of Peace" 'by' the Everlasting Father, which makes more sense, since the Son is not the Father (unless we argue Covenantal fatherhood which I've suggested as an option).
Whereas the LXX says:
"That a child was born to us, a son was given to us, whose beginning came upon his shoulder, and his name is called Angel/Messenger of Great Counsel; for I will bring peace upon the rulers and health to him." - Isaiah 9:5 (Swete Greek Septuagint)
And here no God or gods are mentioned at all.
@@ProselyteofYah I wasn't aware of the complete Tanach Version. Seems more plausible than the typical masoretic based translation.
The key piece of information from the LXX source is that it tells us the Messiah is an angel as opposed to being called a mighty God in other Bible translations. I always thought of Yeshua preexisting as Angel prior to coming to earth in the womb of Mary. There are also a couple of verses in revelations that hints at Jesus having an angelic nature. Personally I think the LXX source is the most accurate and harmonious with the rest of the Bible.
@@Celestial-Cityjohn 1: 1-17; mat. 28:18; hebr 1:8; filip. 2:6-10; kol. 1:15-20; acts 4:12; rom. 10: 9-13; rev. 3: 20,21; 22:12-16
@@Celestial-City It's important also to remember that the term "angel" just means messenger as well. And isn't really the name of a species or creature, but this is a later understanding. All the Heavenly beings are just called spirits or "gods" in the OT. Angel being the "role" that some spirits play.
Logical Fallacies; Their misuse.
Hi Eric, I am a great fan of your work. As a research scientist, I greatly appreciate your appeal to WT’s use of logical fallacies to demolish very effectively their convoluted logic.
I was therefore very surprised at your own (mis)use of logical fallacies in calling out someone (billybari8081) who challenged your statement, in a discussion you had with them, that “Mighty God” is a “bad translation” in Isa 9:6 and would be better translated as “mighty god”, small “g”.
(Jesus is just “a god”, one of many who are called or treated as gods, but who are not (really) God).
Billybari8081 replied to you that “he” (I’m assuming) had checked all the translations on Bible Gateway and found that no Bible Translation committee agree with your claim, not even the NWT.
Unfortunately, he asked sarcastically at the end of his comment if you thought that you were the only Bible scholar who really understood translation better than all the others, .."really?”!!
Nonetheless, you magnanimously acknowledge at the start of the video (with the sub-title “I ..admit that I was wrong”) that you had made a mistake in your comment to Billybari8081.
Great, end of story. You were wrong on this specific point, but you may well be correct on all the other points discussed with Billybari8081- a *separate subject* for another day.
However, you surprisingly, and pointlessly in my opinion, double down on this *specific point/paragraph* concerning experts and Isa 9:6, which you have just conceded, to argue that Billybari8081is guilty of 4 logical fallacies in his paragraph which (correctly) points out your (admitted) error????
**“Appeal to Popularity”
The fact that he went to Bible Gateway to check all the translations, a practice I note that you often recommend, is described as an example of the logical fallacy termed “Appeal to Popularity”
This fallacy involves claiming something is correct because many (non-expert) people think something is so. An example would be if I said that Jesus must be “a god” because many (non-expert) JWs believe that. As they are not experts in the Greek and Hebrew languages, even though they *could* be correct, it is not a valid logical argument. If they were all recognised experts in Greek and Hebrew then their opinion would indeed become relevant.
Referring to (all) the translation experts in the field is NOT an example of the “Appeal to Popularity” fallacy.
**“Appeal to Authority”
Even more surprising, you accuse him of using the “Appeal to Authority” fallacy, because … he cited all the leading experts.
The “Appeal to Authority” *fallacy* involves claiming that something is correct just because someone famous (marginal or irrelevant) said or believes it. However, it is an acceptable, valid argument if the “Authority” cited is in fact an authority on the subject…even more so when it is referring to the opinion of ALL of the experts in the field.
In the video, remember it is specifically addressing your comments regarding Isa 9:6, you accuse Billybari8081 of “accepting an argument as true because scholarly people claim it is so”, rather than addressing the argument. But he *IS* specifically addressing your argument on Isa 9:6.
What concerns me most, even more than the misuse of logical fallacies, is your assuming the spiritual high ground, your spiritual one-up-man-ship.
Quoting Matt 11:25&26, you point out that intellectuals are often wrong (even though, in this case, you are acknowledging that they are in fact correct), and that God often reveals profound truths to (spiritual) “young children”.
You point out that you prefer to be among such young ones that Jesus spoke of.
So, are you claiming that God is revealing to you great truths and hence we should listen to you rather than the (correct, in this case) views of the Greek/Hebrew experts?
In a similar vein, while discussing the allegation of Billybari8081’s use of the “Appeal to Popularity” fallacy, you place yourself alongside the ancient prophets
“How many of the prophets that God sent to warn His people of wrong-doing were in the majority? The majority is usually wrong. Jesus tells us to avoid the majority…Matt 7:13”
But you have conceded that the majority, in this case, are correct
** Strawman argument
“The commenter (Billybari8081) misrepresents my argument by suggesting that I believe I’m the only Bible scholar who understands translation better than all the rest. This is not the case. In fact, I don’t consider myself to be a Bible scholar. I’d rather be that young child Jesus spoke of.”
A “strawman” argument involves deliberately distorting or even replacing the other person's argument and then attacking the distorted, easy-to-refute version of the argument instead of refuting the original point.
Although (sadly) sarcastic, Billybari8081 does not really misrepresent your position.
True, you do not claim to be a Greek/Hebrew scholar, but you appear to believe that the opinions of the world’s leading scholars on Greek/Hebrew translation count as little compared to the hidden truths God has revealed to the spiritual “young child” that you appear to be claiming to be.
** Ad hominem fallacy
“The speaker (Billybari8081) questions my credibility by implying that [it] is unreasonable to believe that Eric understands translation better than all the other scholars”
An ad hominem fallacy is when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position (on Isa 9:6 in this case), you attack some irrelevant aspect of the person who is making the argument. Like me saying you are wrong because you were a JW or you have a beard, or anything else irrelevant to the discussion.
Pointing out in the present context (Isa 9:6) that you are not an expert in Greek and Hebrew is not an ad hominem attack; it is simply a statement of relevant fact. A fact that you magnanimously conceded when you graciously acknowledged your error at the beginning of the video.
Sincerely, Eric
If all of the great majority of experts agree on a subject, then the "appeal to popularity" fallacy still applies. The great majority of scientists agree that we evolved. So claiming we evolved and were not created is both an appeal to authority and an appeal to popularity."
I disagree on the "appeal to authority" fallacy, because "he" wasn't addressing the argument.
The opinions of the "world’s leading scholars on Greek/Hebrew translation" support the Trinity. If you believe in the Trinity, then you will agree with them and consider me to be in the wrong. If you don't believe in the Trinity then you will have invalidated your argument.
On your last point, the ad hominem attack, I agree with you.
@@BeroeanPickets Hi Eric, many thanks for taking the time to reply. I dont know how you manage to reply to all the comments in all the threads, under all your videos!!
Your point about evolution is well argued.
Regarding Scripture, as most of us don’t know Biblical Greek and Hebrew, it is unavoidable that we have to depend on translators and the quality of their work. Yes, sometimes people’s beliefs influence their translations, sometimes the opposite is true - which should always be the case.
The best we can do is to study and weigh their discussions on a given text.
One thing I noticed when I searched for the discussion you referred to (with Billybari8081) under your recent “Prayer” videos was that neither of you, as I can recall, referred to Isa 10:21 which could have shed some light on the meaning of Isa 9:6.
To develop a point that you made, Scripture often (helps) interpret Scripture.
My penny’s worth.
Best Regards, The other Eric
You are so right Brother Eric! "Mighty god" not "Almighty God" - "El Shaddai"!
It is also good to know that according to reference sources, GREEK WAS WRITTEN IN ALL CAPS! Ancient Hebrew on the other hand was always written in small print.
I’m suggesting we hesitate when using the word “God.” It’s not a name, nor an identity. It causes much confusion about the identity of the “Father” and the “Son” and the “Word.” God is a “type.” But it does not tell us who one is talking about per se, unless qualified with identity. For example, God the Father is clear, God the Son is clear, and God the Word is clear per John 1:1. I won’t continue to expound upon the support for these because to do so would require much space. But I will say there is One God. Yet there are essential elements of that one God which we know even when God said “Let “us” make man in our image. (My quotations). I don’t accept that “The WORD” was a created being but was actually God himself, yet NOT “The Father.”
Maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t see how to put a separation between the Word that was made flesh into Jesus from the one The Father used to create and make all things through. The Father sent his WORD into the human family to save them: the ultimate gift of love and mercy.
The Logos was an intermediary figure between the transcendent God and his creation. So the Logos is not God ontologically but is representatively God.
@@k.mcguillicutty5368 “God the Son” and “God the Word” are not scriptural titles of anyone. So what are you talking about? If you take “theos” at John 1:1c to be definite, i.e., “God” as opposed to indefinite “a god” then John 1:1 is teaching Modalism since it would be identifying the Logos as the “ton theon/the God” he was with, which was the Father. Are you a Modalist?
This was an amazing explanation of that person‘s concern or interest in whether Isaiah 96 was referring to God, Almighty, Jehovah or Jesus as a God, a divine one. I had my Bible out and followed along with you and soon as I saw in the New World translation, that Verse six also says Prince of peace, letters and eternal, father and uppercase it made sense that this translation would also put mighty God in uppercase letters showing the title that they was given.
Excellent coverage and I’m going to listen to this again more thoroughly. Thank you for taking the time to give us all some insight on that topic. May Jehovah continue to bless you.
May God bless you. Thanks for your efforts Eric. Bible seems clearer once you start reading it without preconceptions.
So very true!
The truth is so simple when it is revealed by the Father, the God of truth
Truth is not easy. First Corinthians, 4 verse 5. When Jesus? comes will get the truth. Because nobody has the truth today, the real salvation. How God's gonna fix all this.
This was a through discussion in clarifying your critic's complaint! 💯PS: Note that Isaiah 9:6 "Is not present in LXX source. These words only appear in the Hebrew text and were not quoted by Early Christians until after 325 AD. It’s a real mystery how these words got into the Hebrew text." See 2001 Translation
Very informative, last Sunday i was stripped off by a sub CO formy MS and RP privelege al because i reason out.
FREE AT LAST!
@samuelqyap1- I know how you feel. My heart goes out to you.
Will be called, future tense, mighty god!
@rizalitosantos3411- If you look in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, Isaiah 9:6 says nothing about Mighty God or Eternal Father. It looks like that was added in the Masoretic text that Protestant Bibles use.
I found this video to be fascinating!! It has given me so much information to digest. I wish more people from the various church's were willing to question and examine the things they have been taught in light of the Bible. I think many people are starting to see the church's have failed miserably in following Jesus Christ. I look forward to your next video.
Anthony Buzzard might've had the best explanation I've heard and Isaiah 9:6 in a Christian understanding. "Divine hero" - mighty god.
Anthony Buzzard is a Socinian. Socinians don’t believe in the preexistence of Christ just FYI. Interesting though is how the LXX renders “mighty God”, it reads, “Angel of Great Counsel”.
Thank you for sharing this information, clearly said, Jesus christ is considered to the lamb, and in the bible book Revelation, there is only one who can take the scroll out of the hand of the one seated on the throne, no one else was worthy to open the seals of the scroll, only the lamb is worthy to open the seals of the scroll, thank you Eric, well done video,
Yes. In Revelation 19, Almighty God sits on Almighty God's throne while his blood-stained Son sits on a horse.
@@mamajan99 rev. 3: 20,21
Beautiful 👍👍👍👍👍👍
Really enjoyed Jesus’s reaction to how some reacted to the truths he was revealing. It was like a ah huh moment. Why wasn’t Jehovah opening the eyes of these peoples to the truth? Matt 11 :25 He publicly praised his father for hiding these pearls of truth from certain ones. He now really understood. So it is a relief to know some people cannot be convinced of certain truths no matter how hard you try. It’s no longer frustrating.
II am grateful that I have learned a lot from this video, clearly explained based on Bible, not based on human reasoning or academic knowledge of Hebrew texts.
Bible warns us to be wary of worldly wise people. "God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise."( 1Corinthians 1:27 NIV). When Jesus was asked about the sign of the end of the age, the first thing he said was not an increase in wars and wickedness, but to watch out that no one deceives you, for many will come in my name (Matthew 24:4-14 NIV).
@otomeyama- Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this important subject! The Bible warns us over and over not to be deceived. That is Eric's purpose as brother in Christ. He never relies on dogma and the men who preach it.
Спасиба брат Ерик за твое експлэнэшын Гад Блэс ю энд её эти бразэ каторый вы месте работаите Гад блэс ю энд аназэ бразэ Ехова и Исус Кристос. Лавю.❤❤❤❤❤❤
@@maryj7045 says,
"Thank you brother Erik for your explanation Gad Bless you and her these braze katoriy you place work Gad bless you and anaze braze Jehovah and Jesus Christ. Love.❤❤❤❤❤❤"
P.S. I don't understand some of the words. Maybe Google Translate will improve later. :)
Excellent explanation
Hebrews 4 the Word of God is Alive and gives Power!
Is that power of truth
And he will sit down at the right hand of GOD but not to sit beside himself.
Der Vater ist Allmächtiger Gott und Jesus ist mächtiger Gott.
Es ist so einfach.
Der Heilige Geist ist der Atem des Vaters. Ein göttlicher
Helfer. ❤
@Hilde-dj2xf - Vielen Dank! Es ist wirklich so einfach!
Look then Isiah 10:20,21 Jahweh -mighty God (hebr El Gabore) same in Issaiah 9:6
@@zixiswexiacts 4:12; mat. 28: 18; fil. 2:6-11; rev. 3: 20,21; 22: 12-21;
Almighty > Mighty
👍
In the next chapter YHWH is called the Mighty God (Isaiah 11).
@@benz8421 if you are almighty you are also mighty.
Sorry Isaiah 10.
So first your argument was God the Father is the almighty and Jesus is only Mighty, now you’re saying Jehovah is both the mighty and also the almighty. Which is it!? 😂
Very good explanation my Brother Eric.
Awesome video Eric, been watching your videos for the past month, i am a Df Jw and while agree with about 75-80% of JW biblical doctrines i feel hesitant to return due some scriptural reasons plus the governing body acting like they rule over us and we have to agree with them whenever they make a change. So now im just searching for truth Asking Jehovah Almost everyday for it and trying to build a relationship with Jehovah God with out a organization or a group of men, im not saying its bad worshipping in a group/organization , but i want to come to my own conclusions With the help of the holy spirit about the Biblical truth that leads me closer to Jah God; & his Son Jesus Christ. Thanks again eric for this video
You 🫵 . . . are Not , ALONE ! 😉👌
Yes i am also amongst many of you
Ne retournez pas chez la wachtower ils ont dévié complètement du christianisme, Éric a un très bon enseignement sur les écritures je le suis depuis la France au moins je ne suis pas seul . Que Dieu vous bénisse dans vos recherches de la vraie vérité ❤
The Samaritan woman at he well with Jesus had the same problem, she had doubts Jerusalem or Gerizim where should I worship.
We are to worship God in spirit and truth.
John 4.23-24.…23But a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father is seeking such as these to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and His worshipers must worship Him in spirit and in truth.” 25The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When He comes, He will explain everything to us.”…
Organised religions are designed to be confusing and divisive and people move away from them but also take their faith away. but remember Gods word is always true. The confusion is designed to keep us from the truth.
@paulrosser6249
PRECISELY ! 😏 . . . Which Explains the need
to : " put up a hard fight for the faith " . 👊
May we do so in Jesus name ! 💪😌
I appreciate your vidéo lots of confort to me it brings 🎉
@hoppscraft -- thank you!
Thankyou Eric for these reminders I hope the questioner gains a better understanding.
I hope so too!
Another excellent one Eric
Excellent video thanks Eric…
Isiah 48. 7 to open the eyes of the blind, to bring prisoners out of the dungeon and those sitting in darkness out from the prison house. 8I am the LORD; that is My name! (I will not yield My glory to another ) or My praise to idols. 9Behold, the former things have happened, and now I declare new things. Before they spring forth I proclaim them to you.”…
@paulrosser6249- that is a beautiful scripture at Isaiah 48:7-9
Could you make finnish subtitles for this? English isnt my first languange but this seems interesting.
Hi there. Are we even sure Isaiah chapter 9 verse 6 belongs in the Bible? I suspect this verse is a FORGERY. The masoretic version of this verse is completely different from the Septuagint manuscript. Which does not make any mention of "eternal father" or "mighty God". Also, did any of the writers of the new testament ever quote this verse? It would be weird if they didn't use this text to verify Yeshua as the Messiah if it was authentic. Brenton's Septuagint Translation version says "For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him." Do you see the problem here? NOTE: haven't watched the full video yet so maybe you already brought this up
Thank you so very much for that information. I'm going to have to be more vigilant in checking the Septuagint anytime I'm dealing with OT verses.
Yes I noticed too that in the “2001 Translation” those words Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Piece are listed as spurious words.
Great Perspective Eric Thanks
So, in your opinion, who is Jesus if he is not God the son, one person of the trinity? Is he "a" god? Do we have two gods or even more? Is he a created beeing? Is he an angel? You say he is divine. Angels are not divine. Only God is divine. Please guve an explanation. Greatings from Germany
Hebrew 1,5
F o r t o w h i c h o f t h e a n g e l s d i d H e e v e r s a y:
“ Y o u a r e M y S o n , T o d a y I h a v e b e g o t t e n Y o u ” ?
And again:
“ I w i l l b e t o H i m a F a t h e r , A n d H e s h a l l b e t o M e a S o n ”?
Jesus bore the divine name, just like many people and angels before him. Didn't make him Jehovah. But it's pretty clear why the church decided on making him so. I agree with scholars like Bart Ehrman and Dan McClellan who say Jesus never claimed to be the God of Israel but the doctrine of the Trinity tied up a lot of messy details.
@@cygnustsp The Roman Emperor Constantine desired unity among his subjects, Christians, Jews, and the multi-god pagan Romans among others. The Trinity was thus mandated in the 3rd century under his political rule. Trinity is really a politically mandated belief, not a scriptural teaching taught by Christ nor his apostles, Just as Paul warned. Acts 20:29
@@marianna280 Angels are “elohim” or “gods”.-Ps. 8:5 In fact they are specifically referred to as “divine” in Ps. 82:1 which says, “God presides in the divine assembly;
He renders judgment among the gods”. So I’m not sure who taught you angels were not divine but they obviously don’t know what they are talking about.
@@unletteredandordinary Not in my bibel. PS 82, assembly of mighty ones. PS 8, only "angels"
Brother Eric,please I have a question???
I saw the response to my comment.I would like that you address the topic in your program.I would also refer you to Thomas in John 20 v 28(My Lord and my God). Is Thomas violating Exodus 20 v 7?
@edwardmctaggart6841- Perhaps you are mistaken to think that Thomas is calling Jesus God. The context of the verse is something to consider. You might find some insight by reading about this at: trinitydelusion.org/john-2028/
Truth is never complicated its only when we ignore the context to see what out heavenly father is communicating to us. Excellent explanation.
Thank you for your research, Eric. I especially thank you for the thought about Jesus becoming the "step-father" when Adam lost his fatherhood to us and other great not often heard, yet important thoughs. I agree with majority of the video, but the end is confusing to me and does not clarify to me the two previous prayer vids yet.
As I see, the praying to Jesus question moved to one issue only. Who is the God? As you greatly pointed out, the names or I would say "titles"(as each name includes some role or authority of the bearer) in Is 9:6 are not a nature or mere descriptions (capitals), but unique names/titles. To add to your argument, we can see the tense used... his name "will be".
If someone will be a "Mighty God" and "Eternal Father", clearly he is NOT at the time, the verse is written. So clearly if Jesus was NOT a "Mighty God" within lifetime of Isiah, he is NOT the God-father, not the trinity.
I see one important point here. Throughout the bible and especially when Jesus came to earth and when he was resurrected many important titles of high authority changed bearer. Jesus was given title from YHWH like owner and shepherd of the sheep, king, saviour, gatherer, judge, etc... titles YHWH used under the chosen nation of Israel. When you read the verse from Mat 11:25, this changed too within 3 years in Mat 28:18. So we can see that titles often move from a person to person. Even in the case of YHWH and his son Jesus. One of the main surprise to me when I woke up and read the bible again, is that even the name God is just a title. The problem is that we view it, due indoctrination, as a description of a nature of YHWH and our father. Not it is a mere title with authority with certain scope. Like your example with satan. You explained greatly when and why Jesus receives the title Eternal Father. I miss when and why he receives the Mighty God and explanation what authority that title has. There is much to say to it, but Rev 21:5-7 is in fact a fulfilment of the Is 9:6 prophesy. The last titles Jesus receives from his father. (Jesus is the only one who gives commands to John "write" through out book of Rev; He is A&O - Rev 22:13; Jesus is the only one who gives water of life; etc). So it is why I cannot be in the camp of Trinitarians nor in the camp - Jesus is not God. Jesus inherited this title as was prophesied. Yet, it does not make hime the same person as his father. Nor higher. Yet bible clearly teaches, he will have this title and was revealed he has it. So the prayer question remains. Should the prayer be directed exclusively to "YHWH" or to any bearer of the title God, so to his son included? In my view it is not the "word" itself, it is the topic we pray for makes the difference. If we pray in way of worshiping it belongs to YHWH only, if we pray for help and other stuff (John 14:14, 2.Cor12:8) that belong under authority of Jesus's titles we might direct our prayer/askes,/begs/calls to him. So, we should be very careful and never pray to Jesus in a way that would make our heart or our listeners confused about clear status, roles, titles and names belonging to YHWH and Jesus. That is my view.
Victor, Jesus did not not tell his followers to pray to him for help. He told us to pray to our Father.
@@vintage6346 Just do not get stick to the word "pray". In John 14:14 Jesus openly said, we should "ask" directly him for anything. He did not said ask father, or ask father through me. No he said "ask me". And Paul did it 3 times as recorded in Bible account. So I can grant you not calling the "process" praying, yet still 1st century christians did ask Jesus and we can too.
@victorlegret9036 "Prayer" is what we are talking about! Biblehub lists many versions that say "And whatever you ask in my name,...". As if you didn't know this?
@@vitisbp1131 As majority of bibles are translated with bias as these translators were members of denominations, no serious bible student should base conclusions on "variations" unless these are rooted in the original language. Even the JW's interlinear admits there is "ask me".
@@victorlegret9036 Is your last sentence missing punctuation?
You ask at 6:07 "God has a nature?" and your answer is: "No, he doesn't...." Is that a misstatement? Or an attempt at a joke or irony or sarcasm? If so, please explain. Or do you believe that God, Jehovah, Yahweh, YHWH does not have a "nature" that He doesn't have characteristics or dispositions or ways of thinking, that He doesn't have a personality?
@johndoe-n3b1v Those using the argument that Jesus is God base their reasoning on the belief that Jesus shares the nature of God Almighty, the Father. In insisting on that premise, they are not referring to his character nor way of thinking, but to his substance, because they illustrate what they mean by using the nature of a human. It goes like this: "I am a human, My father was a human, but I am different from my father yet we are both human. We have the same nature."
I get into that in detail in the previous video of this series which I'm assuming you haven't seen otherwise you wouldn't have misunderstood my premise. If you like, you can view it here: beroeans.net/articles/what-really-wrong-about-praying-jesus
Nice job Eric. The only thing I would challenge you on is your argument that God does not have a nature. God is spirit and is “a spirit”. Thus he exists as a spirit person or being separate and distinct from all other spirits or gods/angels. There are two forms of ontology according to scripture.-1 Cor. 15 The spiritual and the physical. Ontology deals with state of being or nature. Philippians 2 teaches us that Jesus existed in the form of “theos” or “God/a god”. In other words he shared the same nature as God, namely the nature of existing as a spirit. This also suggests spirit beings have a tangible form. What “comes from spirit is spirit”. God is the only unbegotten/uncreated spirit but this does not preclude him from having the nature of a spirit. Remember “nature” can be defined as: “the inherent character or basic constitution” or as “a kind or class usually distinguished by fundamental or essential characteristics” God is a certain kind of being. Beings exist and by necessity have a particular type of nature.
I Jego Syn ma tą samą naturę bo jest zrodzony a nie stworzony, czy tak myślisz, że tak jest?
@elikSW15 Sorry, I read your comment wrong so I’m editing mine. “Created” and “born”
or “begotten” are synonymous in scripture. Read Prov. 8:22-27 What’s born from spirit is spirt. Likewise what’s born from flesh is flesh. Jesus existed in the form of “God or a god”. But he’s an “only begotten god” so their nature was similar but not exact. However, that being said, now Heb. 1:3 says Christ is “the exact representation of God’s nature” or “being”. So at this point in time they are as close in nature as two persons could possibly be. But the word “charaktar” or “representation” signals the idea of the imprint in a wax seal left by a signet ring. Images and representations may be exact copies but you can’t transfer eternal existence from eternity past to a copy. That’s just ridiculous.
@@unletteredandordinary Dziękuję za odpowiedź. Napisałeś, że ich natura jest tak bliska jak to możliwe. No właśnie. Jednak zrodzenie jest jedyną w swoim rodzaju formą powołania do istnienia . Jeśli człowiek ma syna to nie jest on niższej ''natury'' niż ojciec . Więc jeśli Bóg wieczny, zechciał mieć swojego Syna na swój obraz to czemu część wierzących nie chce uznać boskości Syna? Czemu upiera się, że Syn nie jest taki jak Ojciec? W końcu czyta w naszych myślach tak jak Ojciec. Daje życie, sądzi, zmartwychwzbudza, itd. Czy aniołowie maja takie możliwości? Więc czy jest tylko aniołem? Nie może być. Co znaczy ,że jest jednorodzonym Synem , Jednorodzonym Bogiem (bogiem?) ? To , że jest Bogiem ( bogiem), wcale nie znaczy , że jest Tym Bogiem (JHWH), bo jest Synem Boga . Co sądzisz ?
@@unletteredandordinaryOczywiście Syn miał początek i nie jest od wieczności. Zaistniał. Dzięki Bogu, który w tym momencie stał się Ojcem . Dał życie synowi . Ci co mówią że syn był od wieczności mylą się
@elikSW15 Like I said to “beget” and to “create” are synonymous in the Bible. They are used in parallel at Prov. 8:22-25 note: “The LORD created me as His first course,c
before His works of old.
23From everlasting I was established,
from the beginning, before the earth began.
24When there were no watery depths, I was brought forth,
when no springs were overflowing with water.
25Before the mountains were settled,
before the hills, I was brought forth,
So first of all verse 22 used the word “create” to describe the process by which Christ came into existence and then continues to refer to that act of creation as bringing forth (with labor pains) or begetting. Likewise at Ps. 90:2 we see the word “born” is once again used to mean “create”. Notice:
“Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the whole world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God”
Were the mountains “born” or were they “created”? Exactly. So the two words, “born” and “create” are synonymous. How did God “create” or “beget” his sons? Well that’s a metaphysical question that no one can truly answer with any real understanding. All we know is that “all things came
out of the Father”.-1 Cor. 8:6 Justin Martyr likens it to a fire lighting another fire. The initial fire isn’t diminished from the creation of the other fire. But one definitely preceded the other and shares the nature of the one that “lit” it. So I don’t know why people object to Christ’s divinity? If I were to guess I’d say it’s partly because they just don’t know what the Bible says on the topic or they are overcompensating as a defense mechanism against the Trinity doctrine. But Jesus is a “son of God” and therefore “a god”. If God called “gods” those to whom the word of God came (the angelic sons of God who presided over the nations), and the Scripture cannot be broken” like Jesus clearly told the Jewish religious leaders then who are we to contradict him? Even Moses was made “God to Pharaoh” and to Aaron. I understand that this was strictly in a functional sense though. Moses did not share in the nature of “theos” nor was he created or made an immortal “life-giving spirit”. Jesus was though and so can rightly be viewed as a “divine being” but then so can God’s other sons. They just have not been given life in themselves or immortality.-John 5:26
Hate to change subject but is 1John 5:7,8 spurious, seems to indicate Trinity?
High Likelyhood! "Missing from every ancient Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, Slavic, Georgian, Coptic, and Arabic manuscript. Did not appear in any Greek manuscript of the Bible until the 14th or 15th century - approximately 1,400 years after the Apostle wrote this Bible book." See 2001 translation comments
Eric you said Jesus never claimed to be God true verbatim, but by making the claim in Jn. 8;58 "Most assuredly I say to you before Abraham was I AM". Is that not a claim that He is God? secondly There is only one true God, we agree, then you said satan was a mighty god, and Jesus is a mighty god. Did Almighty God create other gods? I don't believe so. The other god's you referred to in 1 cor. were not true god's there, they were man made god's, there is only one true God. Thus either the Lord Jesus Christ is one with the Father or you move into a doctrinal error by saying there are two gods similar to the JW's teaching Jehovah Almighty God and Jesus a god.
Very true. if Jesus is not God then he is a created being and christians would be guilty of idolatry.Only God is perfect and again and again scripture states that God is the only saviour.It seems that Eric still believes the JW lies.
@@edwardmctaggart6841 I'm a former JW , I was born again, in 1983, the marking point of my conversion came when I embraced the true identity of Jesus Christ. I am very glad for the ministries that help JW's see the error in there organization however there is still that God shaped vaccum that can only the indwelling presence of Christ can fill . God Bless.
Cher ami, je voudrais que vous transmettiez mes sincères condoléances à la famille de monsieur Penton, qui a été une personne formidable et courageuse 😢
Hi Eric. I watch your videos but im not a follower. You say the knowledge does not come from intellectual prowess but from insiration. So, are you receiving that inspiration?
That is not what I said, @marcbrady5898. I said: "Because this truth is gained not by intellectual prowess, but because it is revealed to us by God."
I then explained what that meant by quoting from Matthew 16:13-17. Particularly verse 17 where "Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven."
There is a difference between being inspired and being led by the spirit to truth. Jesus tells us: “. . .However, when that one comes, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come.” (John 16:13)
and John further clarifies by writing: "As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit-just as it has taught you, remain in him." (1 John 2:27)
What all that means is that if you try to understand scripture without opening your heart to God's holy spirit, then you will end up being guided by a different spirit, that of the world which lies in the power of Satan. Fleshly thinking versus Spiritual thinking. The spirit of the flesh, versus the Spirit of God.
Ok. Duly noted. I may have misinterpreted what you said
I meant I am not a follower in that I'm not subscribed to the channel. Plan to subscribe soon
Why did Jesus received worship? If he is not God?
👏😍👍🤝
My technique for answering Isaiah 9:6 is the same one Jesus used in John 10:33-35 when he answered the Pharisees' belief that Jesus made himself God. Well, I accept that the Bible calls Jesus God, but that does not mean that He is the almighty God because in Genesis 32:24-28, 30 and Judges 13:21, 22 also calls the angels God. This shuts them up without having to enter into the sterile debate or struggle about whether Jesus is God or not.
@reynaldorey2020 - The only issue with that is that any given angel would never be address as God, or called God. An angel could be called a god. Do you see the difference?
@@BeroeanPickets No, Eric. That is a question of semantics, since neither in the original Hebrew nor in the original Greek were letters capitalized. With these examples, I did not say that Jesus is an angel, which I do not believe he is, but that even an angel can be called God. Did you read the biblical accounts?
@@reynaldorey2020 Not semantics but grammar. In Greek, "God" is rendered "THE GOD" and "a god" is rendered "GOD". The definite article is used to distinguish God Almighty from any other god, good or bad. So in Greek, an angel is not called God (ho theos, THE GOD) but instead he would be called simply (a god, theos). Remember, there is no indefinite article in Greek. So to say in English that Jesus is God, but not God Almighty is a contradiction in terms, because God (ho theos, THE GOD) is almighty and every other god (theos, GOD) is not.
@@BeroeanPickets I agree with that, I have used that same line of discussion many times and it does not work to convince a Trinitarian because fanaticism blinds them. We must accept that the Bible with or without the article, capitalized or uncapitalized, the Bible calls our Lord Jesus Christ “God.” Denying that is what sparks the discussion with Trinitarians. I find it effective to shuts them up with another line of debate, the one used by Jesus.
But this example given by author isn’t correct cos even though the Bible says that God has anointed us with his Spirit it never calls us „christs” (anointed ones). In the NT this title belongs only to Jesus.
Those who are anointed with the Spirit are called „Christianos” - not Christos - which means „the one who belongs to Christ” (the one who belongs to the anointed one).
These are two different things (even if the root word is the same) and the Bible is very precise about that. The rest are just the assumptions and suggestions imposed by people who want to prove their theories.
Why do you insist that God should fit into human understanding?
For His thoughts and ways are higher than ours.
Sounds like you’ve held on to some JW doctrines even after finding their faults.
He has sadly. His analysis here is grossly incomplete.
There is no teeth to your comment. At what point was any insisting going on? And how do you arrive at your perception of any of this? What do you actually know about people's relationships with their heavenly Father? Please do expound. I would love to hear this. Sincerely. You comment is so vague, I'm having a hard time giving it any credibility. Thank you.
@@kariberger4978
Sure,
@14:30 “How can Jesus be brother and father at the same time? He can’t.” His insisting here.
He can because The LORD is one.
I don’t know anything but only whatever they speak about. Eric has held on to Arianism even after discovering the JW org is a false prophet. But with everything take it to your secret place, ask Him yourself.
1 John 2:27.
May His spirit lead you to all truths 🙏
@@emanuel31323ok so by you're saying that Jesus is God when clearly the number of scriptures in the bible stating otherwise....is this not yourself insisting?
I see Eric's comment as a logical conclusion. There are no dogmatic undertones whatsoever.
@@kariberger4978
Bummer.
It is absolutely a dogmatic statement. No undertone needed.
But because it aligns with your perception you don’t see it.
But like I said, pray about it. Ask The Father yourself. He is a rewarded if those who seek Him diligently. Don’t take any person’s word for it, but test every spirit.
Thanks, Eric, another clear, Biblical explanation.
The Trinity was one of the first things I studied over my 10 year awakening process, using even Trinitarian-biased translations, and it just never made sense to me. But the fact it didn’t make sense wouldn't have mattered IF the Bible teaches it... but nowhere in the Bible is the Trinity to be found.
What you said towards the end makes perfect sense... they can't see it because the Father has not revealed it to them.
Thank you for your clear teaching. You interpret nothing: you kust let the Bible speak for itself and you tell it how it is. Thats a humble teacher ❤🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Well, I did such study and found that at least Jesus is Deity. Can we discuss this subject cos I wonder how the scriptures teaches something else. Jesus is Deity.
How do you understand Rev 5:8-14?
@koz2270 I'm no scholar, but I like to let the Bible speak for itself.
I think you may be referring specifically to the portion in Revelation 5:13 where it says "And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, 'To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honour and glory and might for ever and ever!' " ESV.
I've heard trinitarians use this to say "see, every creature in heaven, Jesus is in heaven, therefore he is not a creature, and must be the uncreated God." On the surface, it may seem plausible, but any conclusions we come to from a verse must harmonise with all of Scripture. And I happen to agree with what Eric said about Jesus being begotten by God in his video series dealing with the Trinity, and that God exists outside of space and time, while we exist within it. Angels also exist in it. The Word, or Logos, was begotten by God and can enter into creation, and he can also be with God. As God begat him before the creation of the physical universe , the Logos also existed before time itself, and is therefore eternal like God. Without time, there can be no beginning. No ending. Makes perfect sense and fits with what is said of Christ in Philippians and Colossians etc.
The Bible tells us Jesus is God's only begotten Son, John 3:16, the Greek mo•no•ge•nes`, means unique, one of a kind. So he is unique, but he is the Son of God, not God himself.
Jesus is no mere angel, certainly not Michael the archangel, but he is not the Almighty. That's how I understand it 🤗
@JonParente
I see, I think I need to go and watch all the said about Trinity. I admit I haven't watch all his content on that subject.
The point you made about Jesus eternality is true.
Traditional trinitarian doctrine does not teach that Jesus is the same person as God, only that he shares the same essence as God.
I think what I had in mind in rev 5:8-14 is worship given to Jesus. Worship makes one a Deity.
I am not a scholar either, but I did my personal research on this subject and concluded that Trinity for the most part is the only way we can correctly synthesize what the scriptures say about God.
If we say only God the father has such divine essence, and is worshipped, we have many scriptures to contend with, one of them is rev 5. I like to start from verse 8 since the worshipful praise started from there.
@koz2270 ah, I see. Not putting Eric on a pedestal, but I liked the way he brought out what the Scriptures say about worship.
Because I've come away from the Jehovah’s Witnesses cult, I'm very careful now to believe only what's in the Bible. What doesn't help is that we're all reliant on translations in our own languages, and Eric beautifully highlighted the words translated as "worship" in a lot of Bibles. For example, the NEB uses "pay him homage" in Hebrews 1:6 (interesting that it's God who says that about the Son, so it's the Father who commanded the angels to pay him homage or worship).
In Revelation 5:8 though, the NEB says "worship".
I'm still learning, and have a lot to learn. I love that Eric gives Jesus his due honor, whereas cults like the Jehovah’s Witnesses demote him to an angel 🫣
Jesus also said about Jehovah that "he has committed all the judging to the Son, in order that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He that does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." John 5:22, 23
So if any worship (proskuneo) is directed to the Son, its at the Father's direction and to his glory.
Nice video, Eric. And don’t get mad when people ask you questions in the comments. Many of us want to know more and argue to find the truth. With this said I have a question. How is the Son an Eternal Father? I think the word Father is clear from what you exposed in the video. But how is he an Eternal Father? It seems to me that his title of Father is contingent to actions in time, yet to happen. Hence, how is he “eternal” in this context?
My understanding is that as the last Adam, he becomes the father of all those humans who are saved through their repentance under the kingdom of God. I'm referrring to those who will be judged in the second resurrection. Those who become his children, who will never die, means that he will always be a father to them.
@ fair enough. Thanks a lot
@@BeroeanPicketsget your point Eric
tam w tekście hebrajskim interlinearnym , nie ma , że jest ojcem wiecznym !
Tam jest : '' Ojcem na wieki'' . A to jest duża różnica. Też kiedyś zmyliło to mnie. Ale mam tekst dosłowny i sprawdziłam. Więc OJCIEC NA WIEKI , bo tak będzie .
1 Cor 8, 5And although there are some who are called ‘gods’ (whether heavenly or earthly, for there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’), 6we only have one God -the Father- from whom everything came, and we’re in Him.
There’s also just one Lord, Jesus the Anointed; everything is in his hand, and we are in his hand too. (No where in scripture is Jesus called God almighty. Not even in the book of Isaiah.)
@clintfitzpatrick266 - Well said and if we look at the Septuagint, we will see that Isaiah 6:9 doesn't even contain the words "Mighty God" or "Eternal Father." 9:6
From the Septuagint Isaiah 9:6 --"For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him."
There are many things that the Masoretic text has added.
ONCTION DE L ESPRIT SAINT : COMMENT ? PREUVES ?
***(1 Jean **2:20**-21) [...] vous avez une onction [qui vient] du saint ; tous, vous avez la connaissance. 21 Je vous écris, non parce que vous ne connaissez pas la vérité, mais parce que vous la connaissez, et parce qu’aucun mensonge ne vient de la vérité.***
---qui est véritablement Oint ? ou choisi ? pour faire partie des 144000 aux cieux ?
---qui est véritablement 'Oint' ? ou 'choisi' ? pour faire partie de "la grande foule" des "autres brebis" de YHWH et de JC ?
***(Révélation 14:1-5) 14 Et j’ai vu, et regardez ! l’Agneau qui se tenait debout sur le mont Sion, et avec lui cent quarante-quatre mille ayant son nom et le nom de son Père écrits sur leurs fronts. 2 Et j’ai entendu un bruit venant du ciel, comme le bruit des eaux nombreuses et comme le bruit d’un fort tonnerre ; et le bruit que j’ai entendu était comme celui de chanteurs qui s’accompagnent de la harpe, jouant sur leurs harpes. 3 Et ils chantent comme un chant nouveau devant le trône et devant les quatre créatures vivantes et les anciens ; et personne n’était capable d’apprendre ce chant à fond, sauf les cent quarante-quatre mille, qui ont été achetés de la terre. 4 Ce sont ceux qui ne se sont pas souillés avec des femmes ; en fait, ils sont vierges. Ce sont ceux qui continuent à suivre l’Agneau où qu’il aille. Ceux-ci ont été achetés d’entre les humains comme prémices pour Dieu et pour l’Agneau, 5 et on n’a pas trouvé de mensonge dans leur bouche ; ils sont sans tache.***
---avez-vous des preuves ou des témoignages à apporter?
---qui est véritablement "oint" ou choisi par YHWH et JC, pour faire partie du peuple du vrai Dieu, peuple qui vivra sur la terre, dans le monde nouveau promis en compagnie des réssuscités?
Cf. ***(Jean **6:44**-47) 44 Personne ne peut venir vers moi, si le Père, qui m’a envoyé, ne l’attire ; et je le ressusciterai au dernier jour. 45 Il est écrit dans les Prophètes : ‘ Et ils seront tous enseignés par Jéhovah. ’ Tout homme qui a entendu [ce qui vient] du Père et a appris vient vers moi. 46 Non que quelque homme ait vu le Père, excepté celui qui vient de Dieu ; celui-ci a vu le Père. 47 Oui, vraiment, je vous le dis : Celui qui croit a la vie éternelle.***
Cf. ***(Jean 6:64, 65) [...] . 65 Alors il dit encore : “ Voilà pourquoi je vous ai dit : Personne ne peut venir vers moi si cela ne lui est pas accordé par le Père. ”***
kim był Chrystus w niebie zanim urodził się na ziemi Łk 2:7 ??
Ok. I know Jesus is not God because it does not make sence, but what does it mean to say that Jesus is divine?? If Jesus is divine but not God then what does it mean to be divine? In other words what is the definition of divine and how does it apply to Jesus. Thank you
I have to remind myself that not one word of English was ever in the Hebrew or Greek scriptures. Thus we must do the best in their translation. For example, we might say that Devil's food cake is divine. Translation into English, or other languages can be difficult in getting the original spirit. I find it somewhat helpful to look up the etymology of words. For example, "Divine: late Middle English: via Old French from Latin divinus, from divus ‘godlike’ (related to deus ‘god’)."
Just because Hebrew has no capital letters doesn’t mean Jesus is not God. Also who do you say Jesus is and who is the Holy Spirit . Micah 5:1 says Jesus goings forth are from long ago . A description of God. Nasb By the way I am a Christian not a jw. Furthermore in John 1:1 “a” is not in the original Greek. There is much more that can be said about that but for times sake if you really believed an a should be inserted then why not in vs 6 and 13, how about vs 18, does it say God or a God?
The first Christians did not believe in the Trinity. By looking carefully how the believe in the Trinity originated, you can only conclude that it's rooted in pagan religion!
@KenCorulla - In John 1:6, the same God who sent Jesus, sent John. In verse 12, are we God's children or Jesus' children? In 13, are we born of God, or of Jesus? In verse 18, he is called the only-begotten Son of God. Oh, and you do know, don't you that there is no "a" or "an" in Greek, so proper translation requires us to insert the indefinite article to comply with English grammar.
Im the first 🥇😅.
@Emperor_famous - Woo hoo!! 🎉🎈🧡
@@BeroeanPickets good day sir. Please I have an issue that I'm facing with a jw and it about spiritual gift they believe it gone forever because of
1 Corinthians 13:8-13 .
Because of that completeness
They is no longer any spiritual gift. Please how can I handle this .
Thank you sir .
Email me at meleti.vivlon@gmail.com and we'll discuss
0:43 Really TH-cam commenter…..so you’re saying that God was BORN in Isaiah’s prophesy? I thought God is eternal? Crazy…I know.🙄
I hope we agree that the prophesy in Isaiah 9:5 refers to the human being Jesus, born through Mary two thousand years ago, whom Mary was to give the name Jesus (Jehoshua = I Am The Savior) according to Divine Providence. (Luke 1,30-35)
Regarding whom and when, did the following prophecies quoted by Paul in his famous letter to the Hebrews be fulfilled? #
Hebrew 1,5
F o r t o w h i c h o f t h e a n g e l s d i d H e e v e r s a y:
“ Y o u a r e M y S o n , T o d a y I h a v e b e g o t t e n Y o u ” ?
And again:
“ I w i l l b e t o H i m a F a t h e r , A n d H e s h a l l b e t o M e a S o n ”?
Are we not ALL of God? "In the beginning, was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." John 1:1. Is it so hard to believe that God is capable of being anything and everything he wishes? God is the Holy Spirit, God is the Father, and God is the Son. God became the Father, when the Word became Jesus on earth. They are three, but one from the beginning. Jesus said, "I and the Father are one." John 10:30. They are one in unity, but in the beginning were one having never been separated until Jesus was born on the earth.
Sorry, I respect your right to believe what you want, but on this channel we don't believe the trinity doctrine.
@ I respect your beliefs as well. The trinity is just what people call it. It is a man made doctrine. I believe God is all and in all. Without him, we are nothing. For me, it's not about believing God is three in one. It's about believing God is everything, almighty and has the power to be whatever he desires. I'm not arguing with you. Nor do I feel it is worth arguing about. In the end, he will reveal to us what he chooses to reveal. Our purpose is to believe and honor him. Too many times people get caught up in the idea of being right, and all we have is our own human perception. Holy Spirit can and will guide us but we should never assert that we have all the answers. Much respect to you Eric, for being a whistle blower for Christ! I was a JW, born in. Spent 43 years in the lies. Now being lead by Holy Spirit and it is so refreshing.
Kjs, God has revealed to us that he had an only begotten son long before that son came to the earth. A son and his father are two separate entities. Jesus and Jehovah have always been two separate entities.
@@vintage6346 Jesus was the Word. He became flesh and was named Yeshua/Jesus. The Word was God's and was in the beginning with God.
@@Kjs3vw Above, you said, "God is the Son". You are wrong
Please Pray Research and Read the World English Bible with Apocrypha May the Most High YAH Bless us through Yeshua Christ the Messiah the Way the Truth and Eternal life!
To me ,this truth is so clear that I don't understand why it can't be understood by some.
Thank you Eric
Isaiah, 62:1-3, theres no other organization or religion which fulfilled these prophecy, Jehovah's new Spiritual Jeruzalem will be called by The NEW Name of God, Jehovah,
Another falsehood in WT is saying Christ is mighty but God is greater as he is almighty. But they are entirely different Hebrew words. It is only the translation into English that gives the false comparison of one greater than the other. So our reasoning needs to be sound, not convenient
Im not attacking you in anyway and have much respect for you. However, the argument is too complicated for a very clear and straight forward verse. Often times the simplest answer is the correct one.
It’s all very clear…..that’s it’s confusing babble…..
Please
"On l’appellera Conseiller merveilleux, Dieu fort, Père éternel, Prince de paix"
C'est une expression connue à l'époque de l'antiquité et qui servait à qualifier les souverains Assyriens. Oui c'est ce qu'on appelle une TITULATURE des empereurs Assyriens. Mais Isaïe détourne cette TITULATURE IMPÉRIALE Assyrienne pour qualifier le futur Messie. Ainsi il lui donne une STATURE impériale dans l'esprit de ses lecteurs de son époque. Malheureusement, à notre époque, étant donné que les lecteurs de la Bible ne savent pas que le prophète Isaïe utilise ici une TITULATURE impériale Assyrienne, se retrouvent complètement perdus pour comprendre ce que signifie ce passage. Du coup beaucoup de gens interprétent très mal ce verset.
~ non ce verset n'indique pas que Jésus est "Le Dieu fort" (ou "Dieu tout puissant" comme le traduisent certaines versions)
~ ce passage n'indique pas non plus que Jésus est "le Père éternel" c'est-à-dire Dieu le Père
Mais dès qu'on a en tête que c'est une TITULATURE impériale Assyrienne on peut rechercher ce que signifiait cette TITULATURE IMPÉRIALE àl'époquede l'antiquité, (en plus de donner une STATURE impériale):
~ Le roi/ empereur Assyrien était considéré comme "un dieu" parmis de nombreux dieux, et non comme "Le Dieu unique d'Israël"
~ Le roi / empereur Assyrien était qualifié de "Père éternel" en tant que fonction paternelle protectrice du peuple Assyrien, et non comme étant Dieu le Père, Le Dieu d'Israël.
D'autre part, il faut quand même noter qu'à la fin du verset 8 il est expressément spécifié que c'est grâce au zel de JÉHOVAH, Le Dieu d'Israël, que ce futur roi/ empereur messianique obtiendra cette position. Donc il y a bien deux personnes distinctes.
■■■■■■■■■■■■
The true meaning of Christianity returns, not JC personally. It starts with- The proper understanding that biblical creation is of spiritual nature, not material nature has been discovered. Biblical creation is metaphors for psychological factors not material and is the creation of Adam.
THE SECOND COMING OF CHRISTIANITY. (Basics) (sequence)
I will send you Elijah before the great day of the lord.(the nut ball has arrived)
1 The entrance of Elijah the messenger. Embodied in the knowledge of the Old Seers. (The book of Rev. begins)
2 Christianity as present in the world is proven false.
3 The world falls into disbelief.
4 The world mostly takes on the new knowledge.
5 Governments are removed or become inert. 2 camps are created one good-the greater number falls away.
6 The good leave the cities, go into hiding for safety.3
7 End time arrives. The evil with no governance destroy their own kind. (by the hand of man will man's blood be shed)(the great day of the lord).
8 Proper Christianity remains. (natural man) 99
i am one who believes j e s u s to be a created being, from my investigation of the scriptures; but i feel its unwise to dismiss either a majority opinion, or intellectual data. there are thousands of interpretations of scripture, all claiming to be right. obviously none are, at least, not in totality. same reasoning applies to any who claim special knowledge or insight, in that no religion in today's age is breaking down all barriers as did c h r i s t i a n i t y in the first few centuries. if you are a m u s l i m, you are 99.9% certain to leave this life as one; same with every other major faith group. yes, some religions can increase, but that increase is mainly in its own major faith category. there are no present exceptions. the true people of God will be revealed during the great tribulation, as i see it. this isn't to say that we shouldn't prepare best we can, with those in whom we can have some confidence; but it is unwise to dismiss authority who has better access to data than we do. not to dismiss it outright, that's for sure. no one has absolute knowledge right now. no one. this is the problem that many have, that j w s have spouted for more than 100 years; that they have exclusive knowledge. they do not. the true people of God will be discovered during the great tribulation, most likely from every nation and faith system. we have to be ready, to stand with them, at that time.
Isa 9:6 is theophoric. It's just someone's name.
Titles, not names, all referring to Jesus, big difference.
@@jeffm9656 OK. Hezekiah's military title. I agree that it is Messianic, like Immanuel. But both are simply someone's name.
I really wish people could see the clear truth of the nature of God and his son. It's not hard to understand the Father is God Almighty and created his son Jesus before all other things.
So why did the early Christians like the apostles and their followers teach Jesus was not created?. I thought Arianism is a Christian doctrine that is considered a heresy by modern mainstream Christianity.
Vous aussi vous considérez que vous êtes oint.
Donc vous aussi vous grandissez PEUT-ÊTRE la liste de ces faux christ !!!
Are you saying then that Jesus is not God? If you are (I hope not!) Then that would mean that you still believes the JW lies. John 8 v 24 : Unless you believe I AM he(the word he is an addition) you shall die in your sins. If Jesus is not God then Christians are guilty of idolatry.
@@edwardmctaggart6841 read the surrounding context of that verse. Jesus says he has a "Father" multiple times. Do you really believe God has a dad??? No where in chapter 8 does Jesus claim to be God. he only claims that he is the son of God. So when he says "I am he" it means that he is the SON OF GOD.
Eric, maybe I'm misunderstanding your point but the Hebrew text says יִּקְרָ֨א שְׁמ֜וֹ ֠his name will be called which signals that the descriptions that follow are names. The convention in English is to distinguish names by capitalization.
Please
Please
?