₦airaland Forum

This passage in Hebrews 1:8-9 is actually a quote from Psalms 45:6-7 . The K.J.V. reads as follows:

"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."

Verses five and seven are clear and plain; only verse six, as it reads in the K.J.V. is ambiguous. However, other versions clearly take away this ambiguity so that verse six agrees with other Scriptures: namely, there is only One true Mighty One ["Elohim, God, deity"]. This one true Mighty One is Yahweh (Deuteronomy 6:4; John 17:3; Ephesians 4:4). According to many scholars Psalm 45:6 reads "Thy throne O Judge" instead of "O God" which in Hebrew or Greek has the same meanings so that in Hebrew it also could mean Judge instead of a trinitarian translation of the word theos which is generic and has many meanings.

Now, let us consult the following versions:

Targum

Your beauty, O King Messiah, is more stunning than any mortal’s; your lips are endowed with the spirit of prophecy. Due to this the Lord has blessed you forever.

ArtScroll Tenakh Translation

Your throne, O judge, will exist forever and ever; the scepter of equity is the scepter of your kingdom.

Moffatt Translation

"Your throne shall stand for evermore; for, since your sceptre is a sceptre just, since right you love and evil you abhor, so God, your God, crowns you with bliss above your fellow-kings" (Psalm 45:6-7). This would be Yahweh, Yahshua's Mighty One. Yahshua has not crowned himself. Yahweh will crown him when the time is right (Matthew 25:31; Luke 1:32).

"He says of the Son, God is thy throne for ever and ever, ..." (Hebrews 1:8, Moffatt). Someone else is the Mighty One ["Elohim, God, deity"], not Yahshua. Yahshua's throne is Yahweh ["Elohim, God, deity"].

New English Bible

"Your throne is like God's throne, eternal, your royal sceptre a sceptre of righteousness" (Psalm 45:6). Yahshua is not Yahweh ["Elohim, God, deity"]. Instead, Yahshua's throne is like Yahweh's ["Elohim's, God's"] throne.

"God is thy throne for ever and ever, ..." (Hebrews 1:8, Translator's footnote, N.E.B.).

Good News Bible

"Thy kingdom that God has given you will last forever and ever, ..." (Psalm 45:6). In this case, the throne represents the kingdom.

"God is your kingdom ..." (Hebrews 1:8, Translator's footnote Good News Bible).

Jewish Publication Society, O.T., 1916

"Thy throne given by God is for ever and ever, ..." (Psalm 45:7). Yahshua is not declaired to be Yahweh ["Adonai, Elohim, God, deity"]. Instead, Yahweh will give to Yahshua a throne which will last forever (Daniel 7:11-14; Luke 1:32; Revelation 3:21).

Isaac Leeser Translation

"Thy throne, given of God, endureth for ever: the sceptre of equity is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore hath God, thy God anointed thee with oil of gladness above thy associates."

The Bible in Living English

'... but as to the Son "God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of integrity is the scepter of his reign".'

Revised Standard Version

"Your throne is a throne of God, ...:" (Psalm 45:6, R.S.V. Translator's footnote). The same notation is given in Hebrew 1:8, where this Scripture is quoted. This is true, because Yahshua is (at this time) sitting with the Father in the Father's throne. (Hebrews 1:3). Later, he will sit on his own throne, just as he now sits with the Father in the Father's throne (Revelation 3:21). A footnote in the New Revised Standard Version reads: 'Or, God is your throne ...'. A seperate footnote for the passage "... and the righteous sceptre is the sceptre of your ..." (the footnote in reference to "your" reads: 'other ancient authorities read his'.

American Standard Version

"Thy throne is the throne of God" (Margin: Psalm 45:6, A.S.V.).

Heinz W. Cassirer Version, N.T.

"... when referring to the Son he says, It is God who is your throne for ever and ever; and the sceptre showing forth the uprightness which you bear is the sceptre of God's kingdom. You have love righteousness and hated lawlessness. And so it is that God, who is your God, has has anointed you with the oil of gladness, giving you a greater share of it than any of your fellows.

Still quoting:

"Then there are these words: You, Lord [meaning Yahweh, Psalm 102:25], laid the foundations of the earth when it first took its rise, and the heavens are the work of thy hands" (Hebrews 1:8-10; cf. Deuteronomy 4:35-39; Isaiah 43:10, 44:24, 45:12-18).

There is no support here for "two Yahwehs, pre-existent, co-creator" Yahshua. Father Yahweh really is the Creator. He did it all ALONE, with no help (Nehemiah 9:6; Psalm 33:6-9).

End Notes:

Weymouth Version N.T. [Translator's footnote, Hebrew 1:8].

Quote:

"8. O God] Psalm 45 is a Royal Marriage song, and this translation involves the direct address of an earthly king by the title 'God.' The obvious difficulty has led to various conjectures:

(1) 'Thy throne is the throne of God' (so R.V. margin in the Psalm).

(2) 'Thy throne is God for ever and ever.'

(3) A corrupt Hebrew text, 'Yahweh' (God), being a mistake for the almost identical word meaning 'shall be,' - 'Thy throne shall be for ever and ever,' This conjecture is widely accepted, but the writer of the Epistle [to the Hebrews], in applying these words of the Psalm to the Son, would not feel the difficulty; 'Thy throne, O God' may stand." (Emphasis added).

Weymouth indicates the word Yahweh (God) does not actually appear in the original text. If this is true, then the word 'O God' should not be in the first clause of Psalm 45:6, but should read as #3 above:

"Thy throne shall be for ever and ever ..." This is the way Moffatt reads in Psalm 45:6, noted above. The thought is, once Yahshua sits on his own throne (as heir to the throne of David), his rulership will endure forever. There is no support here for two Yahwehs, or for the pre-existence of Yahshua. It is a mistake to take an ambiuous verse in the King James Version and make it into a doctrine which opposes the cardinal principle of the Scriptures,

"Hear O Isryl: Yahweh our Mighty One is ONE YAHWEH" (Deuteronomy 6:4).

Gesenius Hebrew Grammer (Kautzsch-Cowley), 1949 reprint says, on page 415 paragraph (b): "In Psalm 45:7 chis-a-cha' El-o-him' (usually explained as thy divine throne). El-o-him' is most probably a later addition [another suggestion is to read chEl-o-him' like God('s throne: compare section 141 d, note]."

truthislight: Why are you doing this na ?

This scripture you have quoted below about flogging is not talking about Jesus, but rather, Solomon.

Must you pass on false information ?



That ^^^ is where God told Devid that he will not let him to be the one that will build the temple(house) for him, that his hands are stained with blood, but that his son (solomon) after him will build the temple, and that was what happened, is it not so ?

Is it not solomon that build the temple for God ?

But it was Devid that started the plans for building of the temple, but Yahweh said no, that his son will do it after him.

Do you mind quoting the previous verses ?

See, deceit is dangerous, it can cause one his chances of gaining everlasting life.

Dont forget, "liars will not inherit God's kingdom".

Peace.

So, you do not believe that 2 Samuyl 7:12-16 compared to Acts 2:30 is a prophecy fulfilled concerning the Messiah and that when his and our FATHER Yahweh said "I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son." that this is in reference to Solomon alone and that Yahweh will establish Solomon's kingdom forever? Did not Solomon fall short in his obedience to Father Yahweh and in turn you believe that Yahweh is speaking of Solomon's kingdom that will be established forever?

I am aware that this is also in reference to Solomon, but I believe it also to be prophetic of the Messiah. Following are a few other verses that are related:

He said to me, ‘Solomon your son is the one who will build My temple and My courts, for I have chosen him to become My son and I will become his Father. 28:7 I will establish his kingdom permanently, IF he remains committed to obeying My commands and regulations, as you are doing at this time (1 Chronicles 28:6).

Behold, a son shall be born to you who shall be a man of rest. I will give him rest from all his surrounding enemies. For his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quiet to Ysryl in his time. He shall build a house for My Name. He shall be My son, and I will be his Father, and I will establish his royal throne in Ysryl forever (1 Chronicles 22:9).

(See also 1 Kings 6:38, 8:20; 1 Chronicles 17:11-15)
__________________

The prophecy of Yahshua's birth required he was of the true lineage of Dawid:

Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that Yahweh had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Messiah to sit on his throne; (Acts 2:30)

Kepha was quoting the following:

When your time is over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for My Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands. But My love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Shaul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before Me; your throne will be established forever (2 Samuyl 7:12-16).

This clearly contemplates this Dawidic heir is of the "flesh and blood" of Dawid. See also similar Dawidic-lineage prophecies for Messiah in Isayah 11:1-2 and Yeremyah 23:6.

Shaul too understood Yahshua was born of the flesh of Dawid:

Yahshua the Messiah our Master ... was made of the seed of Dawid, according to the flesh;.... (Romans 1:3-4).

Yahshua the Messiah of the seed of David....(2 Timothy 2:8.)

Of this man’s [i.e., Dawid’s] seed hath Yahweh, according to His prophets, raised unto Israel a redeemer, Yahshua (Acts 13:23).

Note also that in the 2 Samuyl 7:12-16 passage I gave reference to above which is prophetic of Yahshua that FATHER Yahweh says of him "When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands."

Bidam said recently "No man can be without sin under the law, it's just not possible." If this were true, then we can not be washed as white as snow from being guilty of our former sins which is disobedience to the Law (1 Yahchanan [John] 3:4). It also can be noted in Scripture that Yahshua was "a man" born "under the law", so Bidam's statement ""No man can be without sin under the law, it's just not possible." does not hold water.

benalvino: which religion are you?

I am not affiliated with any religious organization "of this world."

OliverPin: ok you win. so what next?

Father Yahweh wins in word! What's next? The topic at hand is still open!

truthislight: Sorry mate, am through with you.

Great! Then I will not have to deal with you any more! LOL!

Bidam: No man can be without sin under the law,it's just not possible. If it's possible Adam wouldn't have sinned.Truth is Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit that's why he knew no sin.

Yahshua was a man and he was under the law and he was without sin! The fact is though that Adam did disobey Father Yahweh as is written!

truthislight: Ok, from your answer, we have come to see that you are of the view that Joseph had se.x
with mary and planted a seed in her that came to be called Jesus.

If that ^ is true, and Jesus is a blood son of Joseph that we know Joseph was from Adam, and from the scriptures below, we are told that all human blood decendant from Adam was born in sin, how did Jesus managed not to have inherited the sin of Adam from Joseph ?

See:
12 Therefore, just as tsin came into the world through one man, and udeath through sin, and vso death spread to all men1 because wall sinned—(Romans 5:12).

Douah version
[12] Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned. (Romans 5:12).

^^^

How was it possible for Jesus to be free from the sin of Adam/sinless in other to be able to pay for the sins of Adam for all mankind ?

Please answer ^.

(Dont forget that the OT had taught that we had all been born in sin

One is without sin in that they are in obedience to FATHER Yahweh's instruction [torah, law]. Yahshua, FATHER Yahweh's SON found favor ["grace"] with Him in his obedience to Him. One is also without sin when washed as white as snow from sin. It says "... and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—(Romans 5:12). Was not Yahshua a man and is he not said to take on the sins of the whole would or of all mankind? Is not the following prophetic of Yahshua the Messiah:

When your days are over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for My Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands (2 Samuyl 7:12-14).

For we have not a high priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our weaknesses; but was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15).


Yes, Yahshua was born into a world of sin just as we were, but he instead chose to obey his and our FATHER Yahweh and in turn was without sin. We also can be just as Yahshua and be without sin in that we repent and turn from sin and be washed white as snow. Yes, one does inherit sin (disobedient to FATHER Yahweh) from generations before, but we can be washed clean of all sins. One finds favor ["grace"] with FATHER Yahweh when they obey His instruction and bring forth righteous works. Note that Yahshua told his disciples and the Apostles that they would do greater works than he in that he was leaving and would no longer be with them.

truthislight: ^^^
Always easy for people to cook up ideas in their head, when asked simple questions, they start ejeculating.

Now, since Jesus was not born of a virgin, who then is the father of Jesus ?

Who fathered Jesus to bring him to life ?

Yahseph was the biological father of THE MAN Yahshua. He was of the seed and a desendant of Dawid and was born a mortal man and is like us in EVERY WAY. We have an earthy father and we have a Heavenly Father just like Yahshua.

frosbel: difficult to reconcile your position to Psalm 2:7 , John 1:18 , John 3:16 , John 6:40 , Matthew 1:18 , Luke 1:35.

I will proclaim Yahweh's decree: He said to me, "You are my son; today I have become your father (Psalm 2:7).

This is prophetic of when Yahshua would become Father Yahweh's son. Note that there was a time when Yahshua became His son. This tells me that there was a time that he was not His son.

No man has seen Yahweh at any time; the only begotten son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him (Yahchanan [John] 1:18).

Note the Trinitarian bias in the following transaltion of this verse:

No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known. - New International Version (©2011)

And people try to tell me that there is no bias in translation! Poppycock!

For Yahweh so loved the world, that He gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life (Yahchanan [John] 3:16).

And this is the will of him that sent me, that everyone who sees the son, and believes on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day (Yahchanan [John] 6:40).

Most of the Scripture passages that you have presented simply make it known that Yahshua is Father Yahweh's only begotten son. I do not deny this. We also can become begotten sons (daughters, children) of Father Yahweh, but this does not have anything to do with our pre-existing our birth or being born of a "virgin" just as it does not have anything to do with Yahshua pre-existing his birth and being born of a "virgin." What it is that I deny is that he pre-existed his birth and that he was born of a "virgin", not that he was Father Yahweh's only begotten son. He was the only begotten at that time, sin he is the first fruit of the "first fruits" of many begotten ["born again"] sons (daughters, children) As I had stated previously, I do not believe the accounts of Matthew and Luke as they have been translated and I prefer what is prophesied in Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word over the accounts of Matthew and Luke. Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word is what Yahshua, his disciples and the Apostles lived by. They did not have a so-called "New Testament", since this was written and compiled at a much later date. In order for the accounts of Mattew and Luke to harmonize with Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word, the Messiah was not born of a "virgin", but was in fact a desendant and of the seed of Dawid as Father Yahweh's prophetic word proclaims.

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them (Isaiah 8:20).

The accounts of Matthew and Luke as they have been translated most definately do not speak in accordance with this testamony and His inspired prophetic word.

Yahshua: Born of a "Virgin"?
http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/773295646/virgin-birth

Mee234: He do u know those people whom u claim to know the truth are not conning you. There is nothing in the scriptures to suggest that marry was not a virgin

It is FATHER Yahweh's inspired prophetic word that suggest that the Messiah the SON of Yahweh was not born of a "virgin", since it prophesied that he would be a desendant and of the seed of Dawid:

* The Fruit of His Loins, According to the Flesh

Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that Yahweh had sworn with an oath to him, that of * the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Messiah to sit on his throne; (Acts 2:30).

Kepha quoted from the following:

‘Yahweh declares to you that Yahweh Himself will establish a house for you: When your time is over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for My Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his Father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands. But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever’ (2 Samuyl 7:8-16).

This clearly contemplates this Dawidic heir is of the "flesh and blood" of Dawid. See also similar Dawidic-lineage prophecies for Messiah in Isayah 11:1-2 and Yeremyah 23:6.

Shaul too understood Yahshua was born of the flesh of Dawid:

Yahshua the Messiah our Master ... was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh;.... (Romans 1:3-4.)

Yahshua the Messiah of the seed of Dawid ...[2 Timothy 2:8].

Of this man’s [i.e., Dawid’s] seed has Yahweh, according to his prophets, raised unto Ysryl a redeemer, Yahshua. (Acts 13:23).

Yahshua being of the seed of Dawid or of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh as prophsied in Scripture can not be born of a "virgin". I choose to believe *THE PROPHETIC WORD of Father Yahweh that Yahshua, his disciples, and the Apostles lived by rather than the LATER TRANSLATIONS that erroneously translate Yahshua as being born of a "virgin."

Mee234: If u don't understand those languages but English, hw do u come about the your plenty story and explanation?

Those languages have been translated into English by those who have knowledge of the truth and I have been taught by those who have knowledge of the truth. I also read and study Scripture (2 Timoty 2:15) on a daily basis (Acts 17:11) and I "Prove all things; hold fast that which is right." (1 Thessalonians 5:21) as clearly instructed in Scripture. One must be in obedience to Father Yahweh's instruction [torah, law] to understand it.

frosbel: I like your articles, quite interesting and educative , obviously we have one area of disagreement , the virgin birth.

My only question is why it has taken so long for many in Christendom to realise they have been hoodwinked for hundreds of years with false doctrines, like TRINITY, eternal torment etc ?

* The Fruit of His Loins, According to the Flesh

Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that Yahweh had sworn with an oath to him, that of * the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Messiah to sit on his throne; (Acts 2:30).

Kepha quoted from the following:

‘Yahweh declares to you that Yahweh Himself will establish a house for you: When your time is over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for My Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands. But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever’ (2 Samuyl 7:8-16).

This clearly contemplates this Dawidic heir is of the "flesh and blood" of Dawid. See also similar Dawidic-lineage prophecies for Messiah in Isayah 11:1-2 and Yeremyah 23:6.

Shaul too understood Yahshua was born of the flesh of Dawid:

Yahshua the Messiah our Master ... was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh;.... (Romans 1:3-4.)

Yahshua the Messiah of the seed of Dawid ...[2 Timothy 2:8].

Of this man’s [i.e., Dawid’s] seed has Yahweh, according to his prophets, raised unto Ysryl a redeemer, Yahshua. (Acts 13:23).

Yahshua being of the seed of Dawid or of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh as prophsied in Scripture can not be born of a "virgin". I choose to believe *THE PROPHETIC WORD of Father Yahweh that Yahshua, his disciples, and the Apostles lived by rather than the LATER TRANSLATIONS that erroneously translate Yahshua as being born of a "virgin."

* Most Christians religions "of this world" are out to "do away with" Father Yahweh's "Law and the Prophets" and say that it is "no longer in effect, anulled, made void, and that it is "for the Jews only" and that "it is a burden."

Yahshua said differently:

"Do not even think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to establish them (Mattithyah [Matthew] 5:17).

Shaul also said differently:

Do we then make void the law through belief? Yahweh forbid: Yes! We establish the law! (Romans 3:31).

Yes! The anti-messiah has certainly come as Yahshua proclaimed and they have perverted Father Yahweh's prophetic word to their own destruction. Note that the anti-messiah was there when Yahshua was here on earth. This tells me that there has been a perversion about the Messiah and the words of his and our Father Yahweh that he spoke ever since then and that this perversion has come down to us through erroneous translations of His word.

And every spirit that confesses not that Yahshua the Messiah * is come in the flesh is not of Yahweh: and this is that spirit of anti-messiah, that you have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world (1 Yahchanan [John] 4:3).

* the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh


Yahshua: Born of a Virgin?
http://www.freewebs.com/frank4yahweh/pareidolia.htm

Ihedinobi: In case you are new to NL, what I did could never be construed as dipping into your discussion. You have no idea what I was asking him and I would rather you limit your responses to those who asked you questions. I don't care about your great knowledge. I was calling out frosbel's gross hypocrisy not "dipping into your discussion".

Yes, I do know what you asked him. You asked him "Yeah, frosbel, what's wrong with it?" in response TO A QUESTION THAT HE ASKED ME, which was "... what is wrong with being called a Christian." He did not ask you this question, so why would you dip in and say in response to him "Yeah, frosbel, what's wrong with it?" when he did not know my answer yet, since I had not yet anwered him? This is most definately dipping into our conversation! You need to take your own advise and "limit your responses to those who asked you questions." In other words, Stop dipping! This question was directed to me, not you! Frosbel did not show one bit of "gross hypocrisy" as you have erroneously claimed. You are the one who is showing "gross hypocrisy." Yes, a hypocrite is one who gives advise and does not themselves go by the advise that they have given, but instead does the exact opposite.

Ihedinobi: Why you quote me then? Couldn't you direct your answer to frosbel?

Why did you ask frosbel when frosbel was asking me? Am I not the one that should be responding to this question when it was directed to me? Since frosbel asked me, why would you ask frosbel what he asked me of something that he did not know? I was giving the answer to both of you since frosbel did not know the answer. You are the one who was dipping into the conversation, not I.

Ihedinobi: ^^ Who ask you?

You talkin' to me? If so, frosbel asked me.

Ihedinobi: Yeah, frosbel, what's wrong with it?

It says that they were "called Christians", not that they called themselves Christian:

"Dictionary of the Bible by James Hastings (1963 Charles Scribners's Sons), pg. 138, states under the caption, "3. The Spread of the Name. - Since "Christian" was not originally a self-designation of the followers of Jesus, it is not surprising that it is rarely found in the New Testament." Hastings Dictionary of the Bible further states that Roman authorities gave the Messiah's followers the name "Christians" but the word itself to the pagans is associated with heinous crimes and vices. In this section "4. The Meaning of the Name.- The Roman authorities, who first designated the disciples of Jesus as Christians, attempted thereby to characterize them as a political group or party, held together by their loyalty to the party head, Christos. While originally the title was given for juridical convenience without implying a derogatory sense, the pagan mob must at a very early time have associated it with heinous crimes and vices ... Not too much emphasis should be placed, therefore upon the etymology of christos. Though literally meaning the "Anointed One," i.e. the Messiah, the title soon lost its original denotation and became a personal name in the Greek-speaking church."

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 4, (copyright 1982), pg. 460 states under the caption Christianity: "The concept of "Christianity" (Christianismos), which denotes what is "essence," does not appear in the New Testament writings. Not until the time of the Apostolic Fathers (i.e., The Christian thinkers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries) was it used as a Christian parallel to the concept "Judaism" (Ioudaismos), which the Apostle Paul had used in his letter to the Galatians, chapter 1, verse 13 to characterize the Jewish way of faith and Life. The term Christianity was first used in such a manner by Ignatius the Bishop of Antioch (died c. AD 110), in his Letter to the Magnesians."

Christian - the name given by the Greeks or Romans, probably in reproach, to the followers of Jesus. It was first used at Antioch. The names by which the disciples were known among themselves were "brethren," "the faithful," "elect," "saints," "believers." But as distinguishing them from the multitude without, the name "Christian" came into use, and was universally accepted. This name occurs but three times in the New Testament (Acts 11:26; 26:28; 1 Pet. 4:16). - Easton's Bible Dictionary 1897

1779, from Fr. Alpine dialect crestin , "a dwarfed and deformed idiot" of a type formerly found in families in the Alpine lands, a condition caused by a congenital deficiency of thyroid hormones, from V.L. *christianus "a Christian," a generic term for "anyone," but often with a sense of "poor fellow.", from Latin ChrÄstiÄnus, Christian; see Christian.] Related: Cretinism (1801).

SOURCES:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Christian

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cretin

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cretin

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=idiot+savant

Virgin Birth?
http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/773295646/virgin-birth

frosbel: what are you ? I am interested , Messianic Jew / Hebrew Israelite/ Church of GOD / Simply a Christian ?

I like your theology, BUT, disagree with you vehemently on the Virgin Birth.

I do not accept any of these labels that you have mention in reference to myself as to who I am. As close as I can come to in labeling myself is to say that I am a "Yahdah or Yahudah" which literally and completely has the meaning '[B]A praiser of Yahweh[/B] [I]with outstretched hands[/I]' The groups that you mentioned above do not believe as I do.

I believe that the "virgin birth" doctrine was added on to Scripture in an attempt to support the erroneous "Jesus IS God!", "Holy Trinity", "God the Son" doctrines. Christians that promote these doctrines say that since their "God" impregnated Mary this in turn makes him a hybrid "God-Man" or in actually "God."

hisblud: therefore are you willing to answer on his behalf then?

Never mentioned or suggested that I would answer on ijawkid's behalf. I don't even know what the question was that you posed to ijawkid. I probably have already answered the question in a previous post to someone else. Ask me a question directly and I will do my best to answer it. Again, I was just simply agreeing with ijawkid's post.

Mr anony: Lol, it is interesting to note that even in accusing me of perverting the scripture, you have conceded that it is those who actually understand a language that can correct it. Both of us who don't understand Greek and Hebrew will simply have to rely on the English translations that we actually understand.


This is what we call circular reasoning. You are arguing that "Christ coming from heaven is not literal because you believe He didn't pre-exist His birth and that Christ did not pre-exist His birth because you believe that the passages that say He came down from Heaven are not literal". That's fallacious reasoning my friend.

John 6:62 destroys this argument. . . .or do you also want to suggest that Jesus Christ was also trying to deliberately confuse His disciples too by also telling them that He will ascend back to Heaven where He was before?


Interesting. Yet this Word has seen the Father and only does what He has seen the Father do. Also in John 3, This Word has been in Heaven and seen and heard things which He now testifies.


Lolol, wow was that really what you wanted? perhaps I should have demanded that you show me where the bible uses the exact phrase "Jesus did not pre-exist His birth".

I rely on English translations since this is the language that I speak. I have never suggested that I know Hebrew or Greek fluently and I do not believe that one does to understand Scripture. When I study Scrtipture I compare the diverse translation, consult the footnotes and give reference to the Greek and Hebrew Lexicons for definition. Your major perversion of Scripture is in that many times you state that the Scriptues say this and that, when in fact what you say they say is never found said in ANY Scripture translation. I believe that Yahshua did not pre-exist his birth for the simple fact that Scripture nowhere says that he did. In fact, Yahshua had to be born (come into being) as a man and be like us in every way. It only stands to reason in accordance with this Scriptural fact that since we did not pre-exist our birth, Yahshua also did not pre-exist his birth, since he had to be like us in every way. He was different in that he obeyed his and our FATHER Yahweh's commandment and in turn for doing so was without sin. We are in turn to follow in his example in being perfect as his and our Heavenly Father and Creator in Heaven is perfect. Since he had to be made like us in every way, he also was not born of a "virgin."

TABLE TURN!: You are arguing that "Christ coming from heaven is literal because you believe He did pre-exist His birth and that Christ did pre-exist His birth because you believe that the passages that say He came down from Heaven are literal". That's fallacious reasoning my friend.

On some occasions, even his disciples did not understand his parables, and asked him to explain (Mt. 13:36; Mark 8:14-17).

Yahshua is not LITERALLY Father Yahweh's word. Father Yahweh's word is not a separate being that pre-existed with Him in the beginning. There is no such teaching in Scripture that the word seen the Father. Father Yahweh's word is simply that, Father Yahweh's word. Yahshua is the spokesman of his and our Father Yahweh's word in this last time period as Hebrews 1:1-2 makes perfectly clear. He was not a spokesman of Yahweh's word until long after his birth. Before Yahshua came into existence (was born) the prophets of old were the spokesmen of Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word. This fact is also make quite clear in Hebrews 1:1-2.

WHO IS THE WORD?
http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/757140248/who-is-the-word

Mr anony: Lol, really? how does that work exactly? How exactly do you go about correcting the translation of a language you don't understand?


Lol, did He literally ascend into Heaven? Mind you in John 6:62 He said He would ascend to Heaven where He was before. So if you think He didn't really descend from heaven, you cannot hold that He ascended either. You need to be consistent.


Lol, this is just you trying to desperately dig yourself out of a hole. No prophet was ever referred to as the bread of life so your argument that "bread of life" means "God's spokesman" is moot. Also it was very clear to everyone present there that Christ was talking of coming from heaven in a very literal sense.


lololol, this is the funniest bit of your reply. Are you seriously demanding for theexact phrase "Jesus pre-existed His birth" to be provided? Surely you know how irrational such a demand is.
Secondly, I wonder what scripture you think I 'twisted' when all I did was post the passages verbatim.

The Scripture is corrected by those who understand. They are perverted by those like you who don't understand in that you add unto Father Yahweh's prophetic word what it simply does not say.

I do not believe that he literally meant that he came down from heaven for the simply fact that he did not literally pre-exit his birth in heaven as an actual being, but he did literally exist here on earth when he came into existence and so in turn he could literally asend to heaven.

You twisted it in falsely suggesting that when Yahshua spoke parabolically about coming down from heaven that he meant this literally. Those present who took Yahshua coming down from heaven literally are those who these parables are hidden.

The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?" He replied, "Because the knowledge of the secrets of the Kingdom of Yahweh has been given to you, but not to them. ... This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand (Mattithyah [Matthew] 13:10-13).

The bread of life is FATHER Yahweh's word that Yahshua His SON spoke in this last time period and the prophets of old most certainly did speak the bread (His word) of life as Father Yahweh directed them.

Yes, I do seriously demand for the exact phrase "Jesus pre-existed His birth" to be provided, since you believe that your so-called "Holy Bible" actaully says this. The fact is, there is no mention in Scripture that Yahshua pre-existed his birth. Yahshua could not have pre-existed his birth, since he had to be a man just like us in every way. Since he had to be like us in every way, he did not pre-exist his birth, but was born (came into existence) in the flesh as a mortal man just like us. We did not pre-exist our birth, so Yahshua did not pre-exist his.

frosbel: how come the old testament is silent on Jesus except in Prophecy ?

Also if Jesus pre-existed, and according to your logic there is ONE GOD but Three persons, how come there is only ONE Throne in Heaven with the one sitted on it referred to as the ancient of days, why should there not be 3 thrones for 3 persons ?

This is because Yahshua existed only in his and our Father Yahweh's plan which is His prophetic word. Yahshua did not literally pre-exist his birth as an actual being as Father Yahweh's word and he was not a spokesman of His word until the last time period and long after he was born or came into existence.

Yahshua also did not LITERALLY "come down from heaven". This is Yahchanan speaking FIGURATIVELY about Yahshua being sent by Father Yahweh Who is in heaven.
http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/708052764/yahshua-came-down-from-heaven

truthislight: "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." (1 Timothy 2:3-4).

^
it is really a pity that that ^ plans of Yahweh is futile, curtsey of you Frank4YAHWE.

Of what use is that ^ statement in scripture then if translation has rendered "all" the plans of Yahweh invalid in all translations !

No thanks to you.

I have never said 'Translation has rendered "all" the plans of Yahweh invalid in all translations! Note that 1 Timothy 2:2:3-4 speaks in the future tense and that redemption is also a future event.

Ndipe: Micah 5:2

King James Version (KJV)


2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.


The Biblical Verse refers to Jesus Christ and further proves that He has always been in existence prior to coming to earth as a human to die for our sins.

"... in the book of Micah it says: But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. This is further proof that He {Jesus} has no beginning, therefore making Him the Eternal God and Saviour my friend.


Jesus most definitely does have a beginning. Matthew speaks of the ‘genesis’ of Jesus Christ. [Matt 1:1]. Neither Matthew nor Luke in their narration about how Christ came into existence, has any concept of literal pre-existence.
Now let us look at the phrase ‘from everlasting’.
The Hebrew is OWLAM (Strong’s 5769). Now note how it is translated in the following verses:
(In each case the word(s) translated from OWLAM are CAPITALIZED)

•mighty men which were OF OLD: Gen. 6:4;

•for those nations were OF OLD: 1 Sam. 27:8;

•the ANCIENT people: Isa 44:7;

•in the generations OF OLD: Isa 51:9;

•Lo, I will bring a nation upon you from far ... it is an ANCIENT nation: Jer 5:15;

•the prophets ... OF OLD: Jer 28:8;

•the people OF OLD TIME: Ezek 26:20;

•tabernacle of David ... as in the days OF OLD: Amos 9:11;

•days OF OLD: Micah 7:14, Mal. 3:4

Although OWLAM in the right context can be used to denote ‘eternity’, it is clear to see that OWLAM in the above cases cannot mean eternal/eternity i.e. eternal mighty men, eternal nations, eternal prophets, eternal people, etc.
And this goes also for Micah 5:2 which is a verse simply speaking about the coming (that is, his first coming) and birthplace of the Messiah (as used in Matt 2:5-6, John 7:42). It is simply saying that the Coming of the Messiah had been depicted and spoken of from days of old, from of old time, even from the time of Abraham, who rejoiced to see his day. [John 8:56]
The KJV English translators being biased by their trinitarian theology used the words ‘from everlasting’.
Therefore, using the same Hebrew word, Micah 5:2 could so easily be
translated: ”… yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from old time.”"
SOURCE: http://adonimessiah..com/2006/08/concerning-micah-52.html

"This passage in Hebrews 1:8-9 is actually a quote from Psalms 45:6-7 . The K.J.V. reads as follows:

"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."

Verses five and seven are clear and plain; only verse six, as it reads in the K.J.V. is ambiguous. However, other versions clearly take away this ambiguity so that verse six agrees with other Scriptures: namely, there is only One true Mighty One ["Elohim, God, deity"]. This one true Mighty One is Yahweh (Deuteronomy 6:4; John 17:3; Ephesians 4:4). According to many scholars Psalm 45:6 reads "Thy throne O Judge" instead of "O God" which in Hebrew or Greek has the same meanings so that in Hebrew it also could mean Judge instead of a trinitarian translation of the word theos which is generic and has many meanings." SOURCE: http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/734899456/did-father-yahweh-call-his-son-god

hisblud: hi are you ijawkid or you wish to answer the question for him?

My mistake! That was ijawkid that I was agreeing with, not you.

Mr anony: I have answered this. Any mistranslations that occur will usually be very minor as is normally expected any time one translates from one language to another. The only way to legitimately claim a mistranslation has occured is if you are fluent in the two languages


This is where you are wrong.

Let us examine scripture:

JESUS IN CONVERSATION WITH NICODEMUS.

Jesus answered him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things? Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. - John 3:10-13 (Emphasis on John 3:13)

---

JOHN THE BAPTIST TELLING HIS DISCIPLES ABOUT JESUS CHRIST.

And they came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness--look, he is baptizing, and all are going to him." John answered, "A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven. You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, 'I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him.' The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom's voice. Therefore this joy of mine is now complete. He must increase, but I must decrease." He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all. He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony. Whoever receives his testimony sets his seal to this, that God is true. For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure. The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand. Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. - John 3:26-36 (Emphasis on verses 31 and 32)

---

JESUS CHRIST SPEAKING TO THE JEWS.
So they said to him, "Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'" Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.
For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." They said to him, "Sir, give us this bread always." Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe.
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."
So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven." They said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, 'I have come down from heaven'?"
Jesus answered them, "Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me-- not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father.
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh."
The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"
So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever." Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.
When many of his disciples heard it, they said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?"
But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, "Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
But there are some of you who do not believe." (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. - John 6:30-66 (Emphasis on verses 38, 41, 42, 46, and 62)

---

Notice that I have taken the pains to quote those verses in their context so that you don't miss exactly what the bible is saying



I suppose you don't think the whole bible is twisted because you have claimed to stand by what it says. Now I'll ask: What method do you use to tell the difference between the "twisted" parts and the non-twisted parts of the bible?

One does not have to be fluent in "the two languages" to legitimately claim a mistranslation has occured.

As I have made known in previous posts, Yahshua did not LITERALLY "come down from heaven":
http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/708052764/yahshua-came-down-from-heaven

When Yahshua parabolically discribed himself as the "bread from heaven" he was speaking of his being the spokesman of his and our Father Yahweh's word in this last time period, not that he pre-existed his birth. Yahshua was not the spokesman of his and our Father Yahweh's word until long after his birth. The prophets of old were the spokesmen of Father Yahweh's word before Yahshua came into existence as Hebrews 1:1-2 makes perfectly clear.

Note that my statement still stands true that nowhere in Scripture is it ever said "Jesus pre-exited his birth." This is a prime example of one twisting Scripture in that they are saying Scripture says something that it plainly does not.

hisblud: sorry am taking them because am on phone. Are u sure of all you wrote up there?

Sounds sure to me in accordance with what is taught in Scripture! Hisbud is just making it clear and sure in accordance with what is taught in Scripture how foolish the doctrine that you are promoting is.

Mr anony: You are shifting goal posts. We are not talking about Trinity, we are talking specifically about whether Christ pre-existed His physical birth.

I have not said that errors cannot be made in translations however the only people who can truly say that a text has been mistranslated are people who actually have a good understanding of the language that has been translated from as well as the one that has been translated to. For instance if I wanted to claim that an English text has been mistranslated from Yoruba, I must be able to understand the two languages in order to legitimately make that claim.

Now, in your long response, the question you neglected to answer was if there are any translations that you think are genuine. If you provide such a translation, then we can proceed to do examine the claims you are making. Or do you think that ALL TRANSLATIONS of the bible are twisted?

If you think all translations are twisted, then we cannot have any discussion because all the documents we would have used to base our argument upon would be unnacceptable to you.

So my question again: Which bible translations if any do you think are free from "twisting"?

You asked in your previous post about error in translation and I gave you an examples. Do you believe that the translation that you use is witout error? I do not believe that any translation is without error.

Would you like to show me from your translation where it says "Jesus pre-existed his birth."? I do not believe there is any translation of Scripture that says this.

Yes, I believe that all translations have been twisted, so we have nothing to talk about.

Mr anony: Ok, now before we proceed further I'd like to address a something you've said here: You have said that you believe the Word of God has been twisted. I'll ask:

1. How exactly do you know that a translation is twisted and another isn't? This is an important question because it wouldn't make sense if you only believe that the bible is twisted in places it doesn't fit with your ideas.

To legitimately claim that the bible is twisted, you have to show that you have access to and correctly understand the original documents then also be able to properly point out exactly where the offending translations have erred.

2. If you can meet the conditions in 1. above (or even if you don't), then please provide which translations if any that you think are not twisted explaining why you think they are more in accordance to the original documents and then we'll work with those.

Once you have provided the translation you want us to work with, then we'll begin investigate and see if according to scripture, Jesus Christ pre-existed His physical birth.

I am keen to hear your reply

When one says "The Bible says "Jesus is God.", this is twisting Scripture, since nowhere in ANY TRANSLATION of Scripture does it say this. What it does say throughout the so-called "New Testament" in your own translation is "Jesus is the SON of God." In this section of Scripture it even ask us to believe and confess this:

Whosoever shall confess that Yahshua is the son of Yahweh, Yahweh dwells in him, and he in Yahweh (1 Yahchanan [John] 4:15).

Another example of twisting of Scripture is with the translators. There are words, verses and even whole paragraphs that has been added to Scripture that changes or takes away from the meaning of what is being said. Take a look through the footnotes in the more modern translations and you will find MANY times that these footnotes will say concerning a certain word or words "Not found in the most ancient (or any former)." manuscripts." Many times it is these manuscripts that they used in translating the Scriptures. It only stands to reason that if these words were not in the most ancient or fomer manuscipts, that these words were not there originally and have been added on to the text of Scripture. The title of the first edition of the KIng James translation was "THE HOLY BIBLE, Containing the Old Testament, AND THE NEW: Newly Translated out of the Original tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties special Commandment". You will note that it says close to this on the more modern King James versions centered on the title page. Do you really believe that there were no errors made in translation with this being the practice of the transltors? Do you really believe there was no bias in translation with those translators who were Trinitarians? I do not!

Mr anony: Let us see how honest you are.

1. Do you believe that the New Testament's account of Jesus Christ is true?
1a. If no, then we have no basis for discussion
1b. If yes, then please give biblical reasons that led you to the conclusion that Jesus Christ did not pre-exist His physical birth

Basically, I don't need any long story. If 1b is true for you, just give your reasons in the following format

Jesus Christ did not exist before his physical birth because.....

1. Yes, I do, but I believe that many translations of Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word have been twisted ("wrest" - 2 Kepha [Peter] 3:16-17) and added on to and in turn taken away from.

1b. No, I do not believe Yahshua pre-existed his birth as an actual being for the simple fact that nowhere in Scripture is such foolishness taught. It is what is actually said in Scripture that leads me to believe that Yahshua was and is "A MAN" and not "God", "a god", a "God-Man, or an "angel". Scripture clearly teaches that Yahshua came in the flesh and Father Yahweh is not flesh and blood.

Yahshua replied, "Blessed are you, Simeon ben Yahnah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father IN HEAVEN (Mattithyah [Matthew] 16:17).

Note that the verse above clearly reveals that Father Yahweh is not flesh and blood. It is clearly revealed in Scripture that FATHER Yahweh is spirit. It is FATHER Yahweh's SOn who is flesh and blood and who was born a mortal being. It is FATHER Yahweh that is an immoratal being, not His SON Yahshua. Yahshua was born a mortal being that was susepible to death. Father Yahweh can not die! I would be impossible for mere men to execute FATHER Yahweh by nailing Him to a pagan cross! Not true with HIs son, since he was born a moratl being that was susepible tp death.

I figured I would give you a different explanation, since I have previously explained why I do not believe Yahshua pr-existed his birth because of other reasons. Please do review my posts!


Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
http://frank4yahweh.tripod.com/ByAndThrough.html

frosbel: @Frank4YAHWEH:

Just realised you are black Hebrew Israelite, and you still observe the LAW especially the Sabbath, sorry mate we are miles apart in our theology and the virgin birth doctrine you promote is false.

No, I am not a "black Hebrew Israelite"! LOL! You disobey Fater Yahweh by not obseving the instruction (torah law)! That makes you lawless in accordance with Scripture!

Scripture Speaks of the Lawless and Those Who Obey

For lawlessness is already at work in secret; but only until the man who is now exercising a restraining influence is removed, and then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Master Yahshua will sweep away with the tempest of his anger, and utterly overwhelm by the awful splendour of his coming. - 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8[/b]

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets. "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every righteous tree bears righteous fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A righteous tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear righteous fruit. Every tree that does not bear righteous fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. "Not everyone who says to me, 'Master, Master,' will enter the kingdom of Yahweh, but only the one who does the will of my Father WHO IS IN HEAVEN. Many will say to me at that time, 'Master, Master, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you workers of sin!'(Mattithyah [Matthew] 7:12-23 ).

What is Sin?

Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness (1 Yahchanan [John] 3:4 - PLEASE DO READ ON!).

All throughout Scripture we are instructed to turn from sin and not to continue in sin. In your not obeying Father Yahweh's instruction (torah, law), do you believe this is following in His will and that you are righteous in doing so? If so, I would strongly suggest that you read and study the verses above in context as a whole and then wake up out of your stuper and consider being an obedient servant of FATHER Yahweh in following in His SON's example in obedience to his and our FATHER Yahweh's instruction (torah, law) as he was and is.

Father Yahweh's Instruction (Torah, Law)
http://www.freewebs.com/frank4yahweh/law.htm