₦airaland Forum

Nachmonides:
I only gave my perspective on the scientific side, to appeal to your senses.

The Bible is not meant to be a book to be scientifically proven. It's meant to pass a message across. It may therefore include things that may or may not be able to be scientifically proven.

Then you should not have asked me the first question you did. I am not interested in wranglings about religious truth.

LordReed:
Then you should not have asked me the first question you did. I am not interested in wranglings about religious truth.

Then you should have accused it from the standpoint of your scientific beliefs.

A religious man could play the same card at your science for failing to pass their religious methods of verification.

Modified: You should have accused it of failing on certain scientific grounds.

Nachmonides:
The identity is God, the identity that they share here is the essence.
Yes they share the same essence, or if you want, are "linked" to it.

Jesus and God the father cannot share the same identity if the identity means personhood, but if it means essence, then they share that same identity.

Ah na wa for this Oga oo....so identity is now split into two. Personhood and essence. Now let's throw away the word identity and stick with Personhood and essence.
So is John 1:18 saying that no one has seen essence(God) at anytime even though Jesus was on earth with the same essence and was seen?

DaddyCoool:
OK, you two, how many times in the Bible was God called "a MAN of war"?

And can you two interprete this passage below.
Son of man and Ancient of days

Have you ever heard of the oldest translation of the Hebrew text, the, Septuagint, that the Jews used when they were in exile and spoke Greek the major language of the world at that time...

This is it translated into English
Exodus 15:3; The Lord bringing wars to nothing, the Lord is his name.

so if I translate YHVH is milhamah had Jehovah's champion of war

The you understand why
Niv and NLT translate it as
Exod.15.3 - The LORD is a warrior; yes, the LORD is his name!

As for the picture text you posted. The ancient of days is God and the son of man is the Messiah Yahsha (Jesus 😀)

Nachmonides:
Then you should have accused it from the standpoint of your scientific beliefs.

A religious man could play the same card at your science for failing to pass their religious methods of verification.

Modified: You should have accused it of failing on certain scientific grounds.

Go look at the question you asked me again.

Truthseeker10:
Ah na wa for this Oga oo....so identity is now split into two. Personhood and essence. Now let's throw away the word identity and stick with Personhood and essence.
So is John 1:18 saying that no one has seen the essence(God) at anytime even though Jesus was on earth with the same essence and was seen?

I'm about to send a long text. — will you read it?

LordReed:
External confirmation with hard evidence. Like evidence of a global catastrophic flood (which we don’t have) or repeatability of some miracle, like someone turning water to wine in a controlled setting (which I bet someone will say you can't test god). This is in general, all evidence must be evaluated on their own merits on a case by case basis.

The Bible has external confirmation with hard evidence.

I have talked about the global catastrophic event and the idea of repeatability of miracles. How that some things are not verifiable through scientific means, how that science is limited.

And that is fine, but that doesn't make what is true not true because science disagrees, or hasn't discovered, or evolved to understanding.

Nachmonides:
I'm about to send a long text. — will you read it?

Oga go straight to the point without contradictions.

Nachmonides:
What do you have to say about this:

Isaiah 9:6, the prophecy about the coming Messiah refers to Him as the "Prince of Peace." (Alright you may argue that he's talking about the coming Messiah)


What about

Psalm 29:11 says, "The Lord gives strength to his people; the Lord blesses his people with peace."

Numbers 6:26 contains the famous blessing: "The Lord turn his face toward you and give you peace."

Well, "peace to his people" is different from "Peace to the world" or "Man of peace" or "Peace loving". Eye for an eye.
God in NT is totally peace loving even up to turning the other cheek

LordReed:
Like wars and rumors of war? Kindly tell me what period of history never had wars and rumours of war.

Great!
Now you're getting closer to the truth.

Remember that Jesus didn't just say wars and rumors of war rather he mentioned several events we can sum up as COMPOSITE SIGN:

In answer Jesus said to them: “Look out that nobody misleads you, 5 for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many. 6 You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for these things must take place, but the end is not yet. 7 “For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another. 8 All these things are a beginning of pangs of distress. 9 “Then people will hand you over to tribulation and will kill you, and you will be hated by all the nations on account of my name. 10 Then, too, many will be stumbled and will betray one another and will hate one another. 11 Many false prophets will arise and mislead many; 12 and because of the increasing of lawlessness, the love of the greater number will grow cold. 13 But the one who has endured to the end will be saved. 14 And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. Matthew 24:4-14

Verse 5: Some politicians will rise and claim they are the savior of the world.
Verse 6: Wars and rumors of war.
Verse 7: Nations will rise against nations and earthquakes in many places.
Verse 8: These are just the tips of the iceberg.
Verse 9: Jesus' true disciples will be arrested and many of them killed.
Verse 10: Many disciples will give up and begin to hate those sticking to the faith.
Verse 11: Lots of people will be led into false religions claiming Christians.
Verse 12: Because of so much irregularities many will turn to atheism as their love for God cools off.
Verse 13: But few will not give up rather they will stick to what they know is fine in the faith.
Verse 14: The GOOD NEWS of God's Kingdom will be preached in all the nations and disciples of the Prince of Peace will prove to be in all the nations as a witness that he is working and gathering his subjects globally, then the end of badness will come.

Now kindly tell me what period of history has these simultaneously occurred just as it's happening today?

Nachmonides:
Exactly, why is God being referred to as Man.

Why? — I ask the JWs who are afraid of John 1:1 and what it means


They are also afraid of comparing Daniel 7:31-34 with Revelation 1:4-8, and Revelation 22:12-15

They just can't wrap their heads around the fact that Christ is God, though not the Father

gohf:
Have you ever heard of the oldest translation of the Hebrew text, the, Septuagint, that the Jews used when they were in exile and spoke Greek the major language of the world at that time...

This is it translated into English
Exodus 15:3; The Lord bringing wars to nothing, the Lord is his name.

so if I translate YHVH is milhamah had Jehovah's champion of war

The you understand why
Niv and NLT translate it as
Exod.15.3 - The LORD is a warrior; yes, the LORD is his name!

??

Truthseeker10:
Oga go straight to the point without contradictions.

Lol. You still won't get it. Wrap your mind around John 1:1-14 first.



The Word was God, that Word became flesh.

Nachmonides:
Lol. You still won't get it. Wrap your mind around John 1:1-14 first.



The Word was God, that Word became flesh.

Jesus(person) that was God(essence) has the same essence(God) with the Father(person). So what essence(God) has anyone not seen at anytime according to John 1:18?

Nachmonides:
Let me address your Objection:

In Numbers 23:19 and Hosea 11:9, the Bible says that God is not a man, emphasizing that God's nature is distinct from humanity. These verses stress God's transcendence and immensity, but they don’t contradict the idea that God can manifest Himself in a human form.


Take your time, research for yourself. It doesn't contradict it.

Look the person recorded to have spoken in Number 23, is also recorded to have revealed this as well
Num.24.7 [Israel] shall pour water out of his own buckets [have his own sources of rich blessing and plenty], and his offspring shall dwell by many waters, and his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom shall be exalted. (AMP)

If you don't understand what is written here is from the original text
7: There shall come a man out of his seed, and he shall rule over many nations; and the kingdom of Gog shall be exalted, and his kingdom shall be increased.

Num.24.17 I see him, but not in the present time. I perceive him, but far in the distant future. A star will rise from Jacob; a scepter will emerge from Israel. It will crush the foreheads of Moab's people, cracking the skulls of the people of Seth.


Those who want to claim it's David or Solomon can't say they destroy the children of Seth who exist now through Noah.
Yes the word for star there also means prince but it speaks of a man, and that's why when Hebrews quoted Psalms he was referring to the scepter of righteousness as Jesus and not God as Jesus

Why do you think God was revealing He is not a man through Balaam and He is not the son of Man

Yes in Hosea 11:9, God says he is not wicked like men, but merciful so he spares us, he saves us. God calls Himself in Hosea their savior who brought them out of Egypt but the man who lead them out was Moses but do they then assume that Moses was the one speaking to them from the great beyond? Do they call or see Moses irrespective of the mighty miracles worked through him, as God?


God is not a man, is the reason we are destroyed. Jesus couldn't and wouldn't be able to save us if not for God's mercy and power.

For God who said the righteousness of a man is what would save them, gave grace to Noah who He judged righteous that his family be saved and gave grace to Jesus that we may be saved. And Grace comes from God and that's why that saving Grace comes through Jesus and not Moses. Because God willed it so.

Nachmonides:
Yes, one has seen God (the Son, or the word), and yes his Identity (or his person, the Son), but one hasn't seen the person, the Father.

If one has seen God, one has seen his person or identity, but not his essence; his nature.



Let me relate it to humans.
The essence of humans refers to the fundamental nature or defining attributes of what it means to be human. In philosophical, theological, and biological contexts.

So these attributes are like, Rationality, Freewill, Moral Capacity, Consciousness, Creativity, Adaptability, e.t c

These attributes are what it means to be human. That is our essence.

It is more abstract that we can only know exist when man acts.

So the essence of God refers to His fundamental nature or "what God is"—the qualities and attributes that define Him as God, some are:

One: God is indivisible and singular in essence, meaning there is only one God. (Deuteronomy 6:4, "The LORD our God, the LORD is one."

Infinite: God’s nature is limitless, not constrained by space, time, or any boundaries.

Eternal: God’s essence exists outside of time—He has no beginning or end. (Psalm 90:2, "From everlasting to everlasting you are God."

Immutable: God’s essence does not change. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Malachi 3:6, "I the LORD do not change."

Is this nonsense not modalism or Sabellianism

That even those in error found it too erroneous to believe

Very simple no one had seen God except Jesus who came from God

Moses and all the rest who "saw" God it's like how Job saw God, Elijah, Ezekiel, Daniel and co, and all the revelation they had of Him was covered or clouded but from Jesus comes the truth

This is something you cannot grasp until you let go of the nonsense you are holding unto

Nachmonides:
God can have an essence because He is a person, or rather, God's essence is what defines Him as a person.


So some his attributes include being eternal, infinite, all-knowing, all-powerful; all these define what it means to be God.


A person refers to an individual being that possesses certain attributes typically associated with humanity or a higher level of self-awareness, rationality, and personal identity.

It cannot be lower, insects are lower, insects are not considered persons because they do not have the qualities or attributes typically associated with personhood (self-awareness, rationality, moral agency, etc.).


So, personhood is understood from the framework mankind has set for himself.
Mankind's Framework: The framework for defining personhood is often anthropocentric—meaning it is based on what humans know, experience, and value. Since insects or other animals don't meet the specific criteria that humans use (such as rationality, self-reflection, moral judgment), they are not seen as persons in this framework.

so though insects and animals have some of the characteristics of essence as you put it, of men, does that make them human?

Or are you saying Jesus has God's attributes you listed "include being eternal, infinite, all-knowing, all-powerful"; all these define what it means to be God.

Jesus isn't all knowing but he is hearing from the Father for all he knows comes from the Father and that which he doesn't or didn't know wasn't revealed to him by the Father.

Jesus was not eternal because he died, eternity does not die. For if it does then we who forsake all to follow are truly miserable.

Jesus wasn't all powerful, he received power, God did works through him and when he went back to God he received power over all under God.

Jesus is not infinite, for he is at the right hand of God and another comforter the Holy Spirit was sent

I and Jesus along with the apostles of Christ are one, for not one word I have spoken is in disagreement with them

Nachmonides:
A separate godship would imply that there are two or more distinct divine natures or gods that are not unified in essence or being. In other words, each "godship" would refer to a separate, independent, and fully autonomous divine entity. This concept would conflict with the idea of monotheism, which is the belief in one God.



Separate godships are often associated with polytheism, the belief in multiple gods. In polytheistic religions, gods are distinct beings, each with its own divine nature, authority, and role.

For example, in ancient Greek or Roman mythology, gods like Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades were viewed as separate beings with their own realms and powers.

even if you turn the lie to be that God is a title, Godhood or Godship which according to you is shared by two persons who walked together in John 1:1 so when two people share a kingship or a kingdom do people say there is only one king.

You see you are trying to fix this your lie into an imaginary box but all your formulas are not working so you either force yourself to believe that it is beyond human understanding and not that it is foolish of you to think so

Nachmonides:
No, John1:1 is not talking of more than one Godship.

so one godship two persons

Because to you God is a title, maybe it is even attainable

LordReed:
External confirmation with hard evidence. Like evidence of a global catastrophic flood (which we don’t have) or repeatability of some miracle, like someone turning water to wine in a controlled setting (which I bet someone will say you can't test god). This is in general, all evidence must be evaluated on their own merits on a case by case basis.

you have the nation Israel, get a visa, buy a ticket go there or better still read your history or listen to those who may not lie to you.

Do you know anyone's certification here that you would say yes I believe evidence provided by you.

You can either believe humans are self existing as they are not created or that God who is self existing formed adam and eve and we were born from them

Nachmonides:
Since there's a God was with God statement in John 1:1, he's telling us one person was with another person. 2 identities. And in same breadth, John tells us the word was God. He's telling us that the word is no different from God he was with.


What essence are you looking for in John 1:18?
You're looking for the word Essence?

so you are saying John wrote according to you, that two persons are God.

After first claiming that God in Genesis 1:1 is plural for the three, you shifted to changing it that it is a singular term.

I pray you repent and remember this period with fondness.

Nachmonides:
Persons: In the context of John 1:1, the Father and the Son are two persons within the Trinity. They have distinct personhoods but share the same essence or divinity.

Identities: Identity can be seen as the way one perceives or understands a person or being. In the case of John 1:1, while the Father and Son are distinct persons, they share the same identity in that they are both fully God—they share the same essence. The Father is not the Son, but the Son is fully divine, and thus, they share the same divine identity.

John 1:1 speaks of two persons—God the Father and God the Son—but they share the same divine essence or identity.

even when two twins bear the same name and identity, say simi, they are called the Simis recognising that they are two

But if according to Naruto's shadow clone, Jesus is a clone then he returns back into the father, now if the shadow clone still exists outside of Naruto and develops a different identity even the manga writers would not call this clone Naruto again. Why

Common sense not to cause confusion

Even animators do not want to be authors of confusion even when it is from their own imagination

Nachmonides:
I'm not wrong when I say 2 identities, or 2 persons


2 identities in that they are distinct persons.

I can also say 1 identity in that they both are God.

so God is not a person but an idea that two people can represent

Please don't agree to this nonsense I just wrote

Nachmonides:
Yes, I can see it.

Jesus and the father share the same identity, and they don't share the same identity at the same time.


1 identity: They both are God

2 identities: Jesus is the Son, God is the Father.


Identity is different from Persons, and Essence.

both God and God is the Father so therefore logic detects that Jesus who is God according to you, is the Father.

Logic is what circuits are designed with

LordReed:
There is no evidence of a global catastrophic flood. Simple. The attempt to equate evidence for the Big Bang with an ancient tale is flat out rubbish. All it takes is a tiny bit of reasoning to know that any ancient civilisation that developed near a body of water will experience flooding and therefore have stories about floods. To leap from that to all flood stories are about some great global flood is absurditiy pro max.

but which of the two do you believe big bang of no origin or the flood

Nachmonides:
Go and do your research on what identity, person, essence means.


They both share the same identity in that they are both God


They both have different identities in persons.

blood is the essence of life, yet that two people have similar blood doesn't make them the same person.

As we see in parents who share blood with their children, it doesn't make them the same, it makes them of one blood but none of them are called blood!!

Nachmonides:
Who are you? - You're a human being
Who are you? - You are the president
Who are you? - You are Donald Trump

Neither does Trump say he is the only human or the only president but he can say he is the only human president named Trump


But with God there is only one God because God is not a race nor a title.

Nachmonides:
There are no contradictions.
I have explained it, Jesus is God, and he is the Son.

the lies and contradictions you deny in your own mind but evident to all following the conversation

Nachmonides:
Who is He? - He is God
Who is He? - He is the Son
Who is He? - He is the Word

so in the beginning was He, and He was with He and He was He?

Nachmonides:
He was referring to the identity of God that could not be seen.

Because he told us the Word, Jesus was God, and was seen.

so God could not be seen but Jesus who you accuse of being God can be seen but was not seen and now is seen right?

Nachmonides:
God is a person.

Who is this person - He is God
Who is this person - He is the word
Who is this person - He is the son

so God is the son of man?

Nachmonides:
It's you that misunderstood it. It was clear to me who understands that identity encompasses both essence and person. Since you highlighted it, I began to clarify it. I would not have clarified it if you hadn't highlighted it.

Why would you just take what I'm saying, I expect you to do your findings and bring your argument if you disagree.

it's only you that understands what you are saying and maybe those like you, if not well even a madman understands him right?

Don't say if he disagrees, he clearly has disagreed with you and still does because what you say is confusion