debosky:

Let's not play with words - if the bible tells us 'who the initiator of salvation' is, please share the scripture.

The bible says Jehovah is the only saviour, the bible also says Jesus is the saviour.

Frosbel answered this question perfectly well,

that he Yahweh is the Initiator of salvation, so that makes Yahweh the "primo" of salvation or saviour.

debosky:

Now saving Israel from the Egyptians is the SAME as saving mankind for eternity?

This is the last time I will ask the question - can you show where the bible says Yahweh is Jesus' saviour? Responding to the rest of your posts is futile - just answer this one question please.

you are a dishonest liar.
He said that Jesus is a saviour on a "grander" scale but you refuse to see that and repeated this lame question here.

truthislight:

you are a dishonest liar.
He said that Jesus is a saviour on a "grander" scale but you refuse to see that and repeated this lame question here.

I don't know whether the ability to comprehend posts is now optional.

This is what ijawkid said:

ijawkid:
Moses freed and carried d isrealites away from egyptian bondage.....

Exactly the same thing Jesus is doing,but on a grander scale......

If it is the EXACTLY THE SAME thing but on a grander scale, then Moses provided eternal life just as Jesus did, but Jesus provided it to more people.

debosky:

He said it is the SAME thing but on a grander scale.

I don't know whether the ability to comprehend is now optional.

If it is the same thing but on a grander scale, then Moses provided eternal life just as Jesus did, but Jesus only provided it to more people.

Debosky ask God for wisdom and study.

aletheia:

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. [Rev 1:8]

Rash and impulsive as ever. . .

No, you are the one that is rash here, the title Alpha and Omega is an exclusive of Yahweh. No?

frosbel:
Debosky ask God for wisdom and study.

If you accept what truthislight posted up there, then you should ask for brighter grammar.

Jesus is doing exactly the same thing as what Moses did? For real?

frosbel:
Firstly , before I commence, can I call you a LIAR and what a shame it is that you try to make me say we are not redeemed through the blood of Jesus , when I have never made such an outrageous claim. You do know who the father of lies is , right ?

^
Story. What I wrote is clear enough. Read again the highlighted line below. . .but of course you are like the old woman who starts fidgeting when dry bones are mentioned. Your trajectory is clear to me and will become apparent in due course.

aletheia:
That we are redeemed through his blood is central to the bible's message from Genesis to Revelation (but of course views such as yours demand that his blood was not necessary for atonement, [u[so I won't be surprised if in time you open threads saying so)[/u].

Any version of the Bible which omits Acts 8:37, or "through His blood," in Col. 1:14, evidently has for its foundation a corrupted manuscript. This corruption can be traced to Origen in 200 A.D. He is supposed to have corrected numerous portions of the sacred manuscripts. However evidence to the contrary shows that he changed them to agree with his own human philosophy of mystical and allegorical ideas. Thus certain so-called original MSS. are corrupt and it is evidently from this source the translations you are fond of have come. Origen taught the "LOGOS" is "KTISMA," meaning the Lord Jesus Christ is a created being (evidently you and he are in concord on this). Thus, he could easily omit Acts 8:37 and other texts which testify to Christ's deity. . .and it is therefore not surprising that you gravitate to translations that affirm your own views rather than translations that remain faithful to the original Greek MSS.

Here is the history of your Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. . .your supposed earliest MSS.
1. 331 A.D. Constantine ordered that an "ecumenical Bible" be written that would be acceptable to every stripe of Christian that was under his jurisdiction. A man by the name of Eusebius was assigned to direct this undertaking. Eusebius was a follower of Origen who rejected the deity of Christ.

2. 1481 A.D. The Vatican manuscript was discovered in the Vatican Library. This is a corrupted manuscript which repeatedly casts aside the deity of Christ. It reflects the Arianism of Origen and is thought by some to be one of the surviving manuscripts done be Eusebius at the command of Constantine. The date of its writing coincides with the "ecumenical Bible" of Constantine.

3. 1844 A.D. The Sinaitic manuscript was discovered at Mt. Sinai in the monastery of Saint Catherine. It agrees closely with the Vatican manuscript and minimises the deity of Christ and is Arian in nature. It is safe to suggest that these two manuscripts were two of the fifty that were written for Constantine.

You make claims about so-called earliest MSS. etc, whereas the evidence shows where the origins of these MSS lie - with Constantine and the very same RCC that you rail against. Aren't you just the hypocrite?

debosky:

I am not struggling with any logic brother, neither am I confused. It is your brother ijawkid who is trying to invent a 'saviour of saviours' - a term foreign to the bible.

It is you who is trying to create a separation between The Father and Jesus in calling Jesus 'a god'.

Let me provide one more reference:
John 10:

30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

*sigh*

a bloody trinitarian that started by lying that he is not a trinitarian and should not be "tag as such"

truthislight:
No, you are the one that is rash here, the title Alpha and Omega is an exclusive of Yahweh. No?

No, it belongs to truthislight. Are you happy now?

debosky:

If you accept what truthislight posted up there, then you should ask for brighter grammar.

Jesus is doing exactly the same thing as what Moses did? For real?

There were many localised saviours in the OT such as Moses Joshua , David , Othniel and Ehud , but they were obviously inferior to Christ Jesus as the Son of the Living God , mighty god, everlasting father of the coming age and wonderful counsellor.

One had a measure of the Spirit but Jesus had the fullness of the Spirit.

This is not under dispute , stop confusing yourself.

American Standard Version
And when the children of Israel cried unto Jehovah, Jehovah raised up a saviour to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.

New International Version (©1984)
Again the Israelites cried out to the LORD, and he gave them a deliverer--Ehud, a left-handed man, the son of Gera the Benjamite. The Israelites sent him with tribute to Eglon king of Moab.

frosbel:
There were many localised saviours in the OT such as Moses Joshua , David , Othniel and Ehud , but they were obviously inferior to Christ Jesus as the Son of the Living God , mighty god, everlasting father of the coming age and wonderful counsellor.

One had a measure of the Spirit but Jesus had the fullness of the Spirit.

This is not under dispute , stop confusing yourself.

It is under dispute by ijawkid - did Moses do exactly the same thing as what Jesus did as saviour? That is the question here. You may claim I am 'twisting' words here, but I am not - I have simply quoted what Ijawkid has said.

Simple yes or not to the above question will suffice.

aletheia:
^
Story. What I wrote is clear enough. Read again the highlighted line below. . .but of course you are like the old woman who starts fidgeting when dry bones are mentioned. Your trajectory is clear to me and will become apparent in due course.

You make claims about so-called earliest MSS. etc, whereas the evidence shows where the origins of these MSS lie - with Constantine and the very same RCC that you rail against. Aren't you just the hypocrite?

You need to take a deep breath and calm down, stop acting like a 'cow' on heat.

I am convinced of your good intentions to understand scripture and develop the right theology , but my guess is you have held on to the false doctrine for so many years and scared to death of losing it. You see that's what happens when you cling to idols.

The truth is we can argue this topic for all eternity until Christ comes and still not agree.

With time, I am sure you will outgrow this interim phase of ignorance.

Pastor Kun: It still beats my imagination how despite all the overwhelming evidence presented on this thread which effectively debunks the trinity myth, trinitarians are still trying their best to twist the bible and make it say what it doesn't say Of what use is belief in the trinity concept to the faith of you guys? The bible doesn't teach it so why add it? What exactly is the spirit behind people insisting on adding to scriptures?

to misdirect people away from the true God Yahweh and lead them to death.

Satan wont rest you know?

frosbel:
Anyway on a more serious note, Jesus Christ is never referred to as Alpha and Omega but First and Last in the context of this chapter.

I agree that Jesus is referred to as the First and the Last not Alpha and Omega.

Is there any other first and last apart from Jehovah? If so, how may 'firsts and lasts' are there in scripture?

What is the difference between Rev 1:17 and the following:

Isaiah 44:6

This is what the LORD says--Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.

Isaiah 48:12

"Listen to me, O Jacob, Israel, whom I have called: I am he; I am the first and I am the last.

Please explain how these previous declarations by Jehovah are different from the declaration in Rev 1:17.

debosky:

It is under dispute by ijawkid - did Moses do exactly the same thing as what Jesus did as saviour? That is the question here. You may claim I am 'twisting' words here, but I am not - I have simply quoted what Ijawkid has said.

Simple yes or not to the above question will suffice.

Sorry I can only speak for what I know.

Moses was an anti-type of a saviour , he represented on a small scale what Jesus was going to do on a global scale.

Kindly consider this scripture :

New International Version (©1984)
The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him - Deuteronomy 18:18

Jesus was like Moses in a sense of saviourship and this was rightly captured by Moses in the above verse.

Have you heard of the term anti-type which is simply a foreshadow of the real thing.

In other words Moses delivered the Children of Israel from physical captivity while Jesus , the real thing, delivered and is still delivering Israel from both spiritual and physical captivity and indeed the whole world.

So Ijawkid has a point.

Stop rushing to conclusions .

[quote author=debosky]

I agree that Jesus is referred to as the First and the Last not Alpha and Omega.

Is there any other first and last apart from Jehovah? If so, how may 'firsts and lasts' are there in scripture?

My goodness, I just explained this a few posts away , did you even bother reading it ?

aletheia:
No, it belongs to truthislight. Are you happy now?

......oh boy, oh boy, oh boy....... Ain't that guy a piece of work?

frosbel:
My goodness, I just explained this a few posts away , did you even bother reading it ?

I did read it, did you state how many 'firsts and lasts' there were in scripture?

More importantly, I have shown that, in the OT, the term first and last referred to Jehovah alone - so why is that term suddenly different in Revelations?

OK so our friends are taking issues with Revelation 1.

But what about Revelation 22 that I posted a long time ago now?

Revelation 22

12 “Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

14 “Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. 15Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

frosbel:

Sorry I can only speak for what I know.

Moses was an anti-type of a saviour , he represented on a small scale what Jesus was going to do on a global scale.

Do you know what scale means?

Did Moses give people eternal life?

Kindly consider this scripture :

New International Version (©1984)
The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him - Deuteronomy 18:18

My brother - LIKE ME is completely different from EXACTLY THE SAME THING. Is it not?

Jesus was like Moses in a sense of saviourship and this was rightly captured by Moses in the above verse.

Have you heard of the term anti-type which is simply a foreshadow of the real thing.

In other words Moses delivered the Children of Israel from physical captivity while Jesus , the real thing, delivered and is still delivering Israel from both spiritual and physical captivity and indeed the whole world.

No problem with any of this - so I don't know why you are rehashing this - none of this addresses the SIMPLE question of whether they are the exact same thing.

So Ijawkid has a point.

Stop rushing to conclusions .

Ijawkid has no point - physical captivity is NOT the 'exact same thing' as spiritual captivity. A foreshadow is not the 'exact same thing' as the real thing.

Your shadow is not the same thing as you.

Moses DID NOT do the exact same thing as Jesus.

In case our friends want to take them together, this is the comlementary part of the above.

Revelation 22:6

The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place."

Revelation 22:16

16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

aletheia:

In order that the brethren might not be deceived by your shenanigans. . .and misplaced labeling. If sure of what you claim, is there any need to appeal to multiple poor bible translations - that is often a tactic to confuse the weak-minded. For example, does the letter Z occur anywhere in the Greek NT? Do the words Alap and Tau occur as well?

Call the KJV whatever name you wish. . .it is however clearly established that the reliable English NT are translated from the received Greek manuscripts. So we shall go to the Textus Receptus to see what is actually written in the Greek manuscript in Rev 1:8:
Rev 1:8 εγω ειμι το α και το ω αρχη και τελος λεγει ο κυριος ο ων και ο ην και ο ερχομενος ο παντοκρατωρ
Transliterated it reads as follows:

egō (G1473) eimi (G1510) ho (G3588) A (G1) kai (G2532) ho (G3588) Ō (G5598) archē (G746) kai (G2532) telos (G5056) 
I           am           the        Alpha  and         the       Omega     beginning    and         end           
legō (G3004) ho (G3588) kurios (G2962)    
says         the        Lord
ho (G3588) eimi (G1510) kai (G2532) ho (G3588) eimi (G1510) kai (G2532) ho (G3588) erchomai (G2064) ho (G3588) pantokratōr (G3841)
                                                                                                               the Almighty          

It is instructive to note that the word θεός (theos): God is not in the Greek Textus Receptus manuscript. . .It would therefore appear that contrary to what you would have us believe, the KJV translation of Rev 1:8 is the one which remains faithful to the received Greek text while the multiplicity of versions which you posted added a word, probably based on their dependence on the Westcort-Hott Greek text. For one such as you who has railed so much against the Roman Catholic Church, this is ironic given that:

It turns out that it is the versions which you hold up above that turn out to be "Catholic cultic" with their reliance on the Westcort-Hort text, rather than the KJV!

What I have written is easily verifiable by anyone consulting the Textus Receptus Greek manuscript and historical works pertaining to Westcort and Hort.

Imagine! You that dont want people to be deceived have quoted a language that they cant read!
How deceitful you are!

Those that are expert in the greek language have gone through that scripture over and over and did come to the conclussion that the kjv is in error and decided what is right, but it is those that cant cant speak greek that u have brought it to again.
Do they speak Greek or they speak 1. English, 2. Hausa, 3. Igbo, 4. Yoruba.

Still the old same deceit.

truthislight:

Imagine! You that dont want people to be deceived have quoted a language that they cant read!
How deceitful you are!

Those that are expert in the greek language have gone through that scripture over and over and did come to the conclussion that the kjv is in error and decided what is right, but it is those that cant cant speak greek that u have brought it to again.
Do they speak Greek or they speak 1. English, 2. Hausa, 3. Igbo, 4. Yoruba.

Still the old same deceit.

A copy and paste Job with the intention of appearing a step above the rest intellectually

@ frosbel

Considering that you issued a challenge about "Alpha & Omega", here now is one for you; please explain/address the following.

Revelation 22

12 “Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

14 “Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. 15Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

Enigma: In case our friends want to take them together, this is the comlementary part of the above.

Revelation 22:6




Revelation 22:16

lol.


Enigma you keep twisting scripture like a snake , how deceptive

God sends Angels and so does his Son.

God has subjected all authority to his Son , or should I show you the bible verse to confirm this .



6 The angel said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God who inspires the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place.”

and then


16“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.” - 22:6-17


1st part is GOD because it says GOD , 2nd part says Jesus because it says Jesus.

Sorry what is your point, surely you do not mean to say that this means v6 and v16 are talking about the same person, right ?

frosbel: lol.

Enigma you keep twisting scripture like a snake , how deceptive

But why do you tell lies like this? All I have done is set out scripture ---- I have provided no interpretation so how could I be "twisting" scripture?

If your problem is that you don't like the version, bear in mind I have used NIV ----- very deliberately because, I think it is the one you support above the KJV. In any event, why don't we work with what you supplied in your post (please confirm what version it is)

So OK --- using what you supplied.

6 The angel said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God who inspires the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place.”

16“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.” - 22:6-17

First of all, if you let me have the version of the Bible, I will like to add one more verse.

OK then, please clarify:

1. Is it one person sending an angel in those two verses?

2. Or is it two persons sending angels?

3. Was one angel sent?

4. Or were two angels sent?

5. Was the angel in each case sent to/through John?

6. Or was one angel sent to/through John while the other was not sent to/through John?

@Enigma

Please forgive my tardiness in responding to your last email. You gave me a bit to think about. But I've replied you today.

Ihedinobi: @Enigma

Please forgive my tardiness in responding to your last email. You gave me a bit to think about. But I've replied you today.

Cheers bros, I will look into it tomorrow by God's grace.

Enigma:

But why do you tell lies like this? All I have done is set out scripture ---- I have provided no interpretation so how could I be "twisting" scripture?

If your problem is that you don't like the version, bear in mind I have used NIV ----- very deliberately because, I think it is the one you support above the KJV. In any event, why don't we work with what you supplied in your post (please confirm what version it is)

So OK --- using what you supplied.






First of all, if you let me have the version of the Bible, I will like to add one more verse.

OK then, please clarify:

1. Is it one person sending an angel in those two verses?

2. Or is it two persons sending angels?

3. Was one angel sent?

4. Or were two angels sent?

5. Was the angel in each case sent to/through John?

6. Or was one angel sent to/through John while the other was not sent to/through John?

So the Trinity , a doctrine consisting of volumes of theological explanation plus history is now hinged on v6 and v16 of revelation 22.

In other words we have cornered you and team to the last book of the bible,revelation 22. That in itself says a lot.

Give me the your answers and I will tell you what I think about them.

Otherwise good night.,

Enigma:

Cheers bros, I will look into it tomorrow by God's grace.

Sweet questions up there. Hadn't thought about it like that

frosbel: So the Trinity , a doctrine consisting of volumes of theological explanation plus history is now hinged on v6 and v16 of revelation 22.

In other words we have cornered you and team to the last book of the bible,revelation 22. That in itself says a lot.

Give me the your answers and I will tell you what I think about them.

Otherwise good night.,

When you do things like this . . . .

Well, let's just say people reading should form their own conclusions on your "approach".



Edit; meant for frosbel!

frosbel:



So the Trinity , a doctrine consisting of volumes of theological explanation plus history is now hinged on v6 and v16 of revelation 22.

In other words we have cornered you and team to the last book of the bible,revelation 22. That in itself says a lot.

Give me the your answers and I will tell you what I think about them.

Otherwise good night.,

Poor Frosbel. Please tell me that it isn't just now that you're realizing how utterly out of your depths you are in this discussion. You batted way out of your league attacking the Trinity. That's why you keep foundering, dude. But of course you won't quit punishing yourself, will you?