benalvino: Should we continue?

So can you present a scripture that says Michael is one of the names of Jesus?

benalvino: So can you present a scripture that says Michael is one of the names of Jesus?

as i said we are not yet in that stage, one step at a time we are stillon stage 1

this argument may not continue[b] unless we agree on a consensus,[/b]

our agreed defination of spirit pneo/pneuma/ruach will give a basis to the nature of jesus;

1,Angel/spirit

2,jesus form before,he he came to the earth

3, and after he cam to earth

3, back to the heaven

the op is not supporting 1,

i understand but im in support of all!

So before Jesus came to earth he was michael the arch angel?

benalvino: So before Jesus came to earth he was michael the arch angel?

this argument may not continue[b]unless we agree on a consensus[/b]

our agreed defination of

1, spirit: pneo/pneuma/ruach

2, jesus form before,he came to the earth

3, jesus form here on earth

4, jesus's form back in the heaven




will give a basis to the nature of jesus;

BERNIMOORE:

this argument may not continue[b]unless we agree on a consensus[/b]

our agreed defination of

1, spirit: pneo/pneuma/ruach

2, jesus form before,he came to the earth

3, jesus form here on earth

4, jesus's form back in the heaven




will give a basis to the nature of jesus;

So what form was Jesus

[size=18pt]2(#e)[/size]

benalvino:

BERNIMOORE you are beginning to go off the cliff... forget confusing your self. when God gave man Breath in Genesis 2:7 was it figurative?
Genesis 2:7 then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
^^^ hebrew for breath neshamah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit



Spirit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The English word spirit (from Latin spiritus "breath" has many differing meanings and connotations, most of them relating to a non-corporeal substance contrasted with the material body. The word spirit is often used metaphysically to refer to the consciousness or personality.


Etymology

The English word spirit comes from the Latin spiritus, meaning "breath", but also "spirit, soul, courage, vigor", ultimately from a Proto-Indo-European *(s)peis. It is distinguished from Latin anima, "soul" (which nonetheless also derives from an Indo-European root meaning "to breathe", earliest form *h2enh1- [2]). In Greek, this distinction exists between pneuma (πνευμα), "breath, motile air, spirit," and psykhē (ψυχη), "soul"[3] (even though the latter term, ψῡχή = psykhē/psūkhē, is also from an Indo-European root meaning "to breathe": *bhes-, zero grade *bhs- devoicing in proto-Greek to *phs-, resulting in historical-period Greek ps- in psūkhein, "to breathe", whence psūkhē, "spirit", "soul"[4]).
The word "spirit" came into Middle English via Old French. The distinction between soul and spirit also developed in the Abrahamic religions: Arabic nafs (نفس) opposite rúħ (روح); Hebrew neshama (נְשָׁמָה nəšâmâh) or nephesh (in Hebrew neshama comes from the root NŠM or "breath"[size=18pt] opposite ruach (רוּחַ rûaħ).[/size] (Note, however, that in Semitic just as in Indo-European, this dichotomy has not always been as neat historically as it has come to be taken over a long period of development: Both נֶ֫פֶשׁ (root נפשׁ) and רוּחַ (root רוח), as well as cognate words in various Semitic languages, including Arabic, also preserve meanings involving misc. air phenomena: "breath", "wind", and even "odour".[5][6][7])

Oboy you are still confusing your self... english and hebrew, greek, latin are not same language... translation from one language to another... when you start all this wikipedia you will go ddeep down the hole...

lets go further... what form was Jesus in heaven... this is according to your list...

[size=18pt]2(#f)[/size]

benalvino: Oboy you are still confusing your self... english and hebrew, greek, latin are not same language... translation from one language to another... when you start all this wikipedia you will go ddeep down the hole...

As you can see,[size=18pt] spirit was derived from spiritus (latin) meaning breath[/size]

a direct root in greek is G4154
πνέω
pneō
pneh'-o
A primary word; to breathe {hard} that {is} breeze

corresponding with rûach H7306

H7306
רוּח
rûach
roo'-akh
A primitive root; properly to {blow} that {is} breathe ; only (literally) to smell or (by implication perceive

Hebrew neshama comes from the root NŠM or "breath"wink opposite ruach (רוּחַ rûaħ).

H5397
נשׁמה
neshâmâh
nesh-aw-maw'
From H5395 ; a {puff} that {is} { wind } angry or vital {breath}divine {inspiration} intellect or (concretely) an animal: - {blast} (that) breath ({-eth}) {inspiration} {soul} spirit.



neshama = inspiration

Hebrew neshama comes from the root NŠM or "breath"wink opposite ruach (רוּחַ rûaħ).

??

Could you go on... and forget this spirit thing? you dont have a case

[size=18pt]2(#G)[/size]

since the english word spirit was originally derived from latin word 'spiritus'=breath equivalent with the greek word pneo,which is the root to pne.uma which also corresponds with hebrew ruach,while neshama(inspiration) was opposite of ruach see 2(#f)

then we can establish two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of spirit,note that spirit is used by the english translators later to be a blanket accomodating all various kinds of persons(supernatural/phisical human/animal)
just the way the word 'Lord' could accomodate different
things;God,jesus,court judges,husbands etc. however it is very easy for TRINITARIANS TO TURN YOU AROUND HIDDING UNDER THE BLANKET NAME 'LORD' but by sticking to the root derivative will keep argument in focus. because they are confused people on their own, so they want people to be like them, hence they attack anyone who has the got to explain into details by mischieviously forcing the argument back to the same point 'lord' so that anything can be lord even a he goat will be 'lord' to a she goat, thats trinitarians for you!

nevertheless we should not forget the root of english 'spirit' derived from latin which means 'breath'

the blanket word 'spirit' could also by analogy accomodates humans,angels,God,satan/demons etc, ..but in what respect?

The two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of 'spirit'

1, phisical beign/form/nature;human/animals= they breath air, and so the air/wind/breeze they breath sustains their body,keep it alive.
2, supernatural beigns/form/nature; God,angels,word,satan/demons= who are resides in air,breeze/wind and invisible

the difference in 1, and 2, above is that

a, (one) relied on a portion of (two) to sustain its phisical body,

b, (two) does not need any portion of (one) to sustains his supernatural form

so, 2 is independent on 1, but 1 is dependent on 2.

therefore

Angels BY DEFAULT belong to 2 above,

jesus(word)by default also belong to 2 above before he came to the earth. he was 'messenger' to God in heaven chech old testament record where God was refering to jesus there in heaven as 'messenger of covenant' malachi 3:1, 'angel of covenant' (dual rheims 1899,derby bible,Amp. bible,wcl bible) rightly put it.




note, to trinitarians this will offend them, expect them to say trash , but that is their opinion. they should come up with a counter explanation rather than beign emotional

thanks

BERNIMOORE: since the english word spirit was originally derived from latin word 'spiritus'=breath equivalent with the greek word pneo,which is the root to pne.uma which also corresponds with ruach,while neshama(inspiration) was opposite of ruach

then we can establish two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of spirit,note that spirit is used by the english translators later to be a blanket accomodating all various kinds of persons(supernatural/phisical human/animal)
just the way the word 'Lord' could accomodate different
things;God,jesus,court judges,husbands etc. however it is very easy for TRINITARIANS TO TURN YOU AROUND HIDDING UNDER THE BLANKET NAME 'LORD' but by sticking to the root derivative will keep argument in focus. because they are confused people on their own, so they want people to be like them, hence they attack anyone who has the got to explain into details by mischieviously forcing the argument back to the same point 'lord' so that anything can be lord even a he goat will be 'lord' to a she goat, thats trinitarians for you!

nevertheless we should not forget the root of english 'spirit' derived from latin which means 'breath'

the blanket word 'spirit' could also by analogy accomodates humans,angels,God,satan/demons etc, ..but in what respect?

The two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of 'spirit'

1, phisical beign/form/nature;human/animals= they breath air, and so the air/wind/breeze they breath sustains their body,keep it alive.
2, supernatural beigns/form/nature; God,angels,word,satan/demons= who are resides in air,breeze/wind and invisible

the difference in 1, and 2, above is that

a, (one) relied on a portion of (two) to sustain its phisical body,

b, (two) does not need any portion of (one) to sustains his supernatural form

so, 2 is independent on 1, but 1 is dependent on 2.

therefore

Angels BY DEFAULT belong to 2 above,

jesus(word)by default also belong to 2 above before he came to the earth. he was 'messenger' to God in heaven chech old testament record where God was refering to jesus there in heaven as 'messenger of covenant' malachi 3:1, 'angel of covenant' (dual rheims 1899,derby bible,Amp. bible,wcl bible) rightly put it.




note, to trinitarians this will offend them, expect them to say trash , but that is their opinion. they should come up with a counter explanation rather than beign emotional

thanks

lol. breath, breeze, wind etc... all are not greek or hebrew...
I think you are doing all this latin thing out of shame...
because now the post you are making are not making sense anymore... we have covered it... everything you see from one language to another is translation....

I have should you the words in hebrew that translate breath and the one that translate spirit. Yet you decide to swim in your confusion... after making embarrassing statements earlier... it was because of this spirit and breath stuff you said animals are sons of men... Lmao and you are still sinking with your confusion... am not ready to stay here for ever... if you are not ready to move on lets give it a rest.

Give it a rest...

Can we continue?
Or we should stop.
All this your post now is not relevant anymore... Its just that you dont have the attitude to accept someone is right n U R wrong that's why you are confusing your self...

Till we go into Jesus am not replying.

benalvino: Give it a rest...

Can we continue?
Or we should stop.
All this your post now is not relevant anymore... Its just that you dont have the attitude to accept someone is right n U R wrong that's why you are confusing your self...

Till we go into Jesus am not replying.

GO TO (2#G) I HAVE STARTED THE SECOND ITEM, JESUS, IT WAS IN BOLD BELOW, YOU WENT PASSED IT, GO BACK! SEE IT BELOW IN BOLD.

BERNIMOORE:

(2#G)

since the english word spirit was originally derived from latin word 'spiritus'=breath equivalent with the greek word pneo,which is the root to pne.uma which also corresponds with hebrew ruach,while neshama(inspiration) was opposite of ruach see 2(#f)

then we can establish two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of spirit,note that spirit is used by the english translators later to be a blanket accomodating all various kinds of persons(supernatural/phisical human/animal)


just the way[b] the word 'Lord' could accomodate different
things;God,jesus,court judges,husbands[/b]etc.

however it is very easy for TRINITARIANS TO TURN YOU AROUND HIDDING UNDER THE BLANKET NAME 'LORD' but by sticking to the root derivative will keep argument in focus. because they are confused people on their own, so they want people to be like them, hence they attack anyone who has the got to explain into details by mischieviously forcing the argument back to the same point 'lord' so that anything can be lord even a he goat will be 'lord' to a she goat, thats trinitarians for you!

nevertheless we should not forget the root of english 'spirit' derived from latin which means 'breath'


the blanket word 'spirit' could also by analogy accomodates humans,angels,God,satan/demons etc, ..but in what respect?


The two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of 'spirit'


1, phisical beign/form/nature;human/animals= they breath air, and so the air/wind/breeze they breath sustains their body,keep it alive.

2, supernatural beigns/form/nature; God,angels,word,satan/demons= who are resides in air,breeze/wind and invisible

the difference in 1, and 2, above is that

a, (one) relied on a portion of (two) to sustain its phisical body,

b, (two) does not need any portion of (one) to sustains his supernatural form

[size=20pt]so, 2 is independent on 1, but 1 is dependent on 2.

therefore

Angels BY DEFAULT belong to 2 above,

jesus(word)by default also belong to 2 above before he came to the earth. he was 'messenger' to God in heaven chech old testament record where God was refering to jesus there in heaven as 'messenger of covenant' malachi 3:1, 'angel of covenant' (dual rheims 1899,derby bible,Amp. bible,wcl bible) rightly put it. [/size]



note, to trinitarians this will offend them, expect them to say trash , but that is their opinion. they should come up with a counter explanation rather than beign emotional

BERNIMORE:
since the english word spirit was originally derived from latin word 'spiritus'=breath equivalent with the greek word pneo,which is the root to pne.uma which also corresponds with hebrew ruach,while neshama(inspiration) was opposite of ruach see 2(#f)

then we can establish two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of spirit,note that spirit is used by the english translators later to be a blanket accomodating all various kinds of persons(supernatural/phisical human/animal)


just the way[b] the word 'Lord' could accomodate different
things;God,jesus,court judges,husbands[/b]etc.

however it is very easy for TRINITARIANS TO TURN YOU AROUND HIDDING UNDER THE BLANKET NAME 'LORD' but by sticking to the root derivative will keep argument in focus. because they are confused people on their own, so they want people to be like them, hence they attack anyone who has the got to explain into details by mischieviously forcing the argument back to the same point 'lord' so that anything can be lord even a he goat will be 'lord' to a she goat, grin grin grin thats trinitarians for you!

nevertheless we should not forget the root of english 'spirit' derived from latin which means 'breath'


the blanket word 'spirit' could also by analogy accomodates humans,angels,God,satan/demons etc, ..but in what respect?


The two distinct categories of forms which falls under the (later usage) blanket name of 'spirit'


1, phisical beign/form/nature;human/animals= they breath air, and so the air/wind/breeze they breath sustains their body,keep it alive.

2, supernatural beigns/form/nature; God,angels,word,satan/demons= who are resides in air,breeze/wind and invisible

the difference in 1, and 2, above is that

a, (one) relied on a portion of (two) to sustain its phisical body,

b, (two) does not need any portion of (one) to sustains his supernatural form

so, 2 is independent on 1, but 1 is dependent on 2.

therefore

Angels BY DEFAULT belong to 2 above,

^^^ all this part is BS... I have discuss them. you know how it is used. you are never wrong so you can keep on reading your Wikipedia about that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit

BERNIMORE: jesus(word)by default also belong to 2 above before he came to the earth. he was 'messenger' to God in heaven chech old testament record where God was refering to jesus there in heaven as 'messenger of covenant' malachi 3:1, 'angel of covenant' (dual rheims 1899,derby bible,Amp. bible,wcl bible) rightly put it.

^^ "I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come," says the LORD Almighty

BERNIMOORE: (dual rheims 1899,derby bible,Amp. bible,wcl bible) rightly put it.

^^^^ it is correct because you feel it is the oldest... lol how ignorant... see below the large font
The King James Version is a translation named after King James I of England, who first commissioned the new English Bible translation in 1604 A.D. and later completed in [size=28pt]1611 A.D[/size]. King James 'authorized' the new translation to be read in churches in England and beyond. Later known as the 'Authorized Version' [size=28pt]in 1814[/size], the King James Version became a standard among English-speaking Christians.

the time it was completed and authorize still date the 1899 bible you are bragging about.

First i wan to ask you if people are borne angels...
secondly how do we know if the messenger is a spirit or human? because you made a statement which you abandon the use of angel... now i can see that you have taken it again...

Ok John the baptist is also a messenger like Jesus... Guess what he has heavenly father and mother... therefore he cannot be from an angel because he is not even from heaven...

Jesus on the other hand is a messenger like John the baptist... he wasn't a spirit like Gabriel on earth... so it is up to you to tell me if Jesus was like Gabriel or not...
therefore Malachi 3:1 doesn't prove Jesus was in the Michael the arch angel

BERNIMORE: note, to trinitarians this will offend them, expect them to say trash grin grin grin grin, but that is their opinion. they should come up with a counter explanation rather than beign emotional

^^^No one have your time... try to remove your mind from pride and showoff

benalvino:

^^^ all this part is BS... I have discuss them. you know how it is used. you are never wrong so you can keep on reading your Wikipedia about that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit

^^ "I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come," says the LORD Almighty


^^^^ it is correct because you feel it is the oldest... lol how ignorant... see below the large font
The King James Version is a translation named after King James I of England, who first commissioned the new English Bible translation in 1604 A.D. and later completed in [size=28pt]1611 A.D[/size]. King James 'authorized' the new translation to be read in churches in England and beyond. Later known as the 'Authorized Version' [size=28pt]in 1814[/size], the King James Version became a standard among English-speaking Christians.

the time it was completed and authorize still date the 1899 bible you are bragging about.

First i wan to ask you if people are borne angels...
secondly how do we know if the messenger is a spirit or human? because you made a statement which you abandon the use of angel... now i can see that you have taken it again...

Ok John the baptist is also a messenger like Jesus... Guess what he has heavenly father and mother... therefore he cannot be from an angel because he is not even from heaven...

Jesus on the other hand is a messenger like John the baptist... he wasn't a spirit like Gabriel on earth... so it is up to you to tell me if Jesus was like Gabriel or not...
therefore Malachi 3:1 doesn't prove Jesus was in the Michael the arch angel


^^^No one have your time... try to remove your mind from pride and showoff

[size=18pt]see 2(#g) and 2(#f)above[/size]

[size=18pt]2(#h)[/size]
[size=18pt]Hebrews 1:5

For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”? Or again, “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son”?[/size]

BERNIMOORE:


[size=18pt]see 2(#g) and 2(#f)above[/size]

i have seen it and you did not make sense...

Malachi you quote john the baptist have earthly parents mother and father, therefore he is a messenger like elijah not like angel gabriel.
Jesus is also a messenger like elijah and not like Gabriel... he wasnt a spirit when he started his ministries on earth...
the messenger Yahweh says he will Send is John

[size=18pt]"I will send my messenger[john the baptist], who will prepare the way before me[YHWH]. Then suddenly the Lord[jesus] you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger[jesus] of the covenant, whom you desire, will come," says the LORD Almighty
[/size]
The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the LORD[YHWH]; Make straight in the desert a highway for our God (Isa. 40:3).

In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the Desert of Judea and saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah: 'A voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him'" (Mt. 3:1-3).

According to Matthew, the prophet Isaiah wrote about John the Baptist, who was to prepare the way for the Lord, or as Isaiah wrote the LORD (YHWH). Yet, it was John who prepared the way for Jesus:
The bible says God manifest in the flesh, it says the word became flesh...

I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt. 3:11).

John prepared the way for Jesus, according to Matthew, but Isaiah says John, who he called the voice, prepared the way for YHWH!

let me explain again
[size=14pt]
“Behold, I send My messenger, and he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight. Behold, He is coming,” says the Lord of hosts.

Behold, I send My messenger: This prophesied[b] messenger[/b] is none other than John the Baptist. Matthew 11:10, Mark 1:2, and Luke 7:27 each apply this promise to John the Baptist.

At the end of Malachi 2, Israel complained that God seemed to reward the wicked and did not exercise His justice in the world. God responds to their complaint by saying, “I will set things right with My Messiah, and before Him will come My messenger.”

And he will prepare the way before Me: In an ancient royal procession the messenger went before the King to announce his arrival, to indicate the route, and to remove any obstacles in the road. John the Baptist fulfilled this exact ministry for Jesus. The same idea is indicated in Isaiah 40:3-5.

God’s purpose for bringing this specific prophecy through Malachi in his day was probably because Israel complained that the Messianic promises of Haggai and Zechariah were not fulfilled. Here Malachi shows that the way for the Messiah must be prepared, and they aren’t ready yet.

Before Me: The Lord promises that He Himself will come - not merely a new or better prophet, but the Lord Himself.

Even the Messenger of the covenant: This second messenger is the Lord Himself - Jesus coming to His temple as the fulfillment of the old covenant and to institute a new covenant.

[/size]

BERNIMOORE: [size=18pt]2(#h)[/size]
[size=18pt]Hebrews 1:5

For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”? Or again, “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son”?[/size]

^^^this says he is not and angel unless you tell me which angel he says that to.

benalvino:

i have seen it and you did not make sense...

Malachi you quote john the baptist have earthly parents mother and father, therefore he is a messenger like elijah not like angel gabriel.
Jesus is also a messenger like elijah and not like Gabriel... he wasnt a spirit when he started his ministries on earth...
the messenger Yahweh says he will Send is John

"I will send my messenger[john the baptist], who will prepare the way before me[YHWH]. Then suddenly the Lord[jesus] you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger[jesus] of the covenant, whom you desire, will come," says the LORD Almighty

The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the LORD[YHWH]; Make straight in the desert a highway for our God (Isa. 40:3).

In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the Desert of Judea and saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah: 'A voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him'" (Mt. 3:1-3).

According to Matthew, the prophet Isaiah wrote about John the Baptist, who was to prepare the way for the Lord, or as Isaiah wrote the LORD (YHWH). Yet, it was John who prepared the way for Jesus:
The bible says God manifest in the flesh, it says the word became flesh...

I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt. 3:11).

John prepared the way for Jesus, according to Matthew, but Isaiah says John, who he called the voice, prepared the way for YHWH!

let me explain again

“Behold, I send My messenger, and he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight. Behold, He is coming,” says the Lord of hosts.

Behold, I send My messenger: This prophesied[b] messenger[/b] is none other than John the Baptist. Matthew 11:10, Mark 1:2, and Luke 7:27 each apply this promise to John the Baptist.

At the end of Malachi 2, Israel complained that God seemed to reward the wicked and did not exercise His justice in the world. God responds to their complaint by saying, “I will set things right with My Messiah, and before Him will come My messenger.”

And he will prepare the way before Me: In an ancient royal procession the messenger went before the King to announce his arrival, to indicate the route, and to remove any obstacles in the road. John the Baptist fulfilled this exact ministry for Jesus. The same idea is indicated in Isaiah 40:3-5.

God’s purpose for bringing this specific prophecy through Malachi in his day was probably because Israel complained that the Messianic promises of Haggai and Zechariah were not fulfilled. Here Malachi shows that the way for the Messiah must be prepared, and they aren’t ready yet.

Before Me: The Lord promises that He Himself will come - not merely a new or better prophet, but the Lord Himself.

Even the Messenger of the covenant: [size=18pt]This second messenger is the Lord Himself - Jesus [/size]coming to His temple as the fulfillment of the old covenant and [size=18pt]to institute a new[/size] covenant.
[/size]

[size=18pt]you admit that This second messenger is the Lord Himself - Jesus
[/size]
the statement would have read;And the Lord, whom you seek, [size=18pt]will become Messenger[/size] of the covenant,

but rather, 'the Lord, whom you seek, (a messenger in his pre-human[size=18pt]'even the Messenger[/size] of the covenant', [size=18pt]and not to become messenger of the covenant[/size]

when the statement was made, was jesus not still there in heaven as a supernatural spirit form/nature? as a 'mesenger' evidently he is yet to become human

and for the fact that jesus was personified as 'Messenger of the covenant' yet in his spirit form

in heaven shows that he was a 'mesenger'

see 2(#g) has taken care of the natures of john, and jesus see 1, and 2 in see 2(#g).[/size]

[size=14pt]Hebrew 1:5(YLT)

For to which of the messengers said He ever, 'My Son thou art -- I to-day have begotten thee?' and again, 'I will be to him for a father, and he shall be to Me for a son?'[/size]

BERNIMOORE: benalvino:



[size=18pt]you admit that This second messenger is the Lord Himself - Jesus
[/size]
the statement would have read;And the Lord, whom you seek, [size=18pt]will become Messenger[/size] of the covenant,

but rather, 'the Lord, whom you seek, (a messenger in his pre-human[size=18pt]'even the Messenger[/size] of the covenant', [size=18pt]and not to become messenger of the covenant[/size]

when the statement was made, was jesus not still there in heaven as a supernatural spirit form/nature? as a 'mesenger' evidently he is yet to become human

and for the fact that jesus was personified as 'Messenger of the covenant' yet in his spirit form

in heaven shows that he was a 'mesenger'

see 2(#g) has taken care of the natures of john, and jesus see 1, and 2 in see 2(#g).[/size]

BERNIMOORE: the statement would have read;And the Lord, whom you seek, will become Messenger of the covenant,

The the statement read that John the baptist Become a Messenger?

The bible says the WORD became flesh... Did it state that Michael Became flesh?
So By you logic of Become... We all should Agree that John the Baptist had a pre-human state in Heaven...
So who was he?

as you claim because the bible did not use become so jesus most be an angel... Guess what it did not use become For John the baptist too...

BERNIMOORE: when the statement was made, was jesus not still there in heaven as a supernatural spirit form/nature? as a 'mesenger' evidently he is yet to become human

and for the fact that jesus was personified as 'Messenger of the covenant' yet in his spirit form

in heaven shows that he was a 'mesenger'

When malachi said I will send my messenger... Was John the baptist in Heaven? was he on earth? lol like i said before when did it say John become a messenger?

can you answer the questions?
Where did it say Michael became Jesus? or flesh?

But the Verse in malachi isaiah Describe Jesus as YHWH. and not just once a couple of times...

Can you also tell me which of the Angel Did the Father beget?

BERNIMOORE: [size=14pt]Hebrew 1:5(YLT)

For to which of the messengers said He ever, 'My Son thou art -- I to-day have begotten thee?' and again, 'I will be to him for a father, and he shall be to Me for a son?'[/size]

You want to start swimming in your confusion again... By the time we will know you will start saying animals are prophets... Like you say animals are sons of men.

We was talking about the angels... Simple. you cant deny that...

benalvino:

You want to start swimming in your confusion again... By the time we will know you will start saying animals are prophets... Like you say animals are sons of men.

We was talking about the angels... Simple. you cant deny that...

I dont understand you here ^.

Can you say what is wrong with this translation if the word angel = messenger :

BERNIMOORE: [size=14pt]Hebrew 1:5(YLT)

For to which of the messengers said He ever, 'My Son thou art -- I to-day have begotten thee?' and again, 'I will be to him for a father, and he shall be to Me for a son?'[/size]

truthislight:

I dont understand you here ^.

Can you say what is wrong with this translation if the word angel = messenger :

a trailer = car does not make a trailer an SUV
Both are called car but they are different kind of cars... if angel = messenger is your reason to put messenger there instead of angel... I want you to tell me how to know if hebrew is in reference to humans or the angels the question still comes

when the passage says messenger, what is it talking about as you say it is the correct translation
1: spirit like Gabriel
2: humans like elijah
3: pigeon

if he can answer this question then we can go on...

the funny thing is that he likes picking bible that has the wrong translation... the other 2 bibles that translate Malachi as angel that he claimed to be the most accurate because it thought they are older than King james didnt translate this passage as messenger... suddenly those are not accurate again but this YLT version which is the only bible that puts messenger there...

you people just like to look for wrong things that makes you guys look like you really have an argument...

The Question Which of the messenger is this [size=18pt]YLT[/size] version talking about... the Host in Heaven? or the humans on earth?

oga truthislight can you answer this... please give me a direct answer.

benalvino:

a trailer = car does not make a trailer an SUV
Both are called car but they are different kind of cars... if angel = messenger is your reason to put messenger there instead of angel... I want you to tell me how to know if hebrew is in reference to humans or the angels the question still comes

when the passage says messenger, what is it talking about as you say it is the correct translation
1: spirit like Gabriel
2: humans like elijah
3: pigeon

if he can answer this question then we can go on...

the funny thing is that he likes picking bible that has the wrong translation... the other 2 bibles that translate Malachi as angel that he claimed to be the most accurate because it thought they are older than King james didnt translate this passage as messenger... suddenly those are not accurate again but this YLT version which is the only bible that puts messenger there...

you people just like to look for wrong things that makes you guys look like you really have an argument...

The Question Which of the messenger is this [size=18pt]YLT[/size] version talking about... the Host in Heaven? or the humans on earth?

oga truthislight can you answer this... please give me a direct answer.

guy, you get plenty problem o, see how you dey stress your life.

All because of >>>>> TRINITY. Smh. Na Ona sabi !

It is simply saying that there is no one anywhere that have ever deserve what Jesus is. > an only 'begotten' son.

(Nowhere ! Heaven or earth)

truthislight: It is simply saying that there is no one anywhere that have ever deserve what Jesus is. > an only 'begotten' son.

(Nowhere ! Heaven or earth)

Hmmm... but not really

benalvino:


the statement read that John the baptist Become a Messenger?

The bible says the WORD became flesh... [size=14pt]Did it state that Michael Became flesh?[/size]

we are still discussing in the old testament, christ pre human identity. he wasnt call 'jesus christ' in the whole OT.

[size=14pt]you are the one that just mentioned micheal now,to confuse y'self, not me! jesus christ was not mentioned too,in the whole old testament, so leave micheal out of this,and stop blabbing [/size]

so By you logic of Become... We all should Agree that John the Baptist had a pre-human state in Heaven...
So who was he?

diversion, you jump like toad,far more than frog i dont swallow your concortions

as you claim because the bible did not use become so jesus most be an angel... Guess what it did not use become For John the baptist too...

so you hate 'become'

When malachi said I will send my messenger... Was John the baptist in Heaven? was he on earth? lol like i said before when did it say John become a messenger?

jesus was a messenger in heaven!

can you answer the questions?
Where did it say Michael became Jesus? or flesh?

[size=14pt]maybe until you tell us where thename 'jesus christ' his most popular name, was ever mentioned in old testament in during all his pre human activity, during the time he was BEFORE ABRAHAM, then i will just rest my case, answer now [/size]

But the Verse in malachi isaiah Describe Jesus as YHWH. and not just once a couple of times...

Can you also tell me which of the Angel Did the Father beget?

really? yhwh indeed

messenger 'word'