Nazarene Space

all this talk about godhead and three or two gods and whatnot !!

 

Get your heads out of the churches for they are germanic/romanic/slavic folk paganism mixed with Yisraeli Scriptures, so stop qouting the "church fathers" as having any knowledge or authority about those Sacred Scriptures for it is well know they themselves only understood the Scriptures by using greek philosophy.

 

 

Let's let the writings speak of the people who knew and saw the Ancient Nazarenes;

They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion – except for their belief in Christ, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that God is one, and that his Son is Yeshua Mshikha (jesus christ in the original writings).

Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.7.2

(It is interesting to note what beliefs Epiphanius contrasts between the Jews and Nazarenes, for the Jews as a whole, excluding the Sadducees, confirm the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things. It is quite possible that the distinction between them was their belief that Jesus will be the one to raise the dead (see John 6:40,44,54) and created all things (see Colossians 1:15-16), thus calling him divine yet the Son of God)

They believe that Messiah, the son of God, was born of the Virgin Mary.

Jerome, Letter 75 Jerome to Augustine

Views: 565

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I stand corrected. Morality does originate from G-d in the sense that He has given mankind free will....and it is our free will to decide the mores of our society. But, free will does include a type of available sovereignty. Only as a gift...not as right.

Joseph Pierce said:
Anayah and Ginger: Now you are both talking about free will of man and how that is reflected by morality.

Let me contend that free will constitutes being an imager of Yahuwah.

Again, without free will, you wouldn't know what morality is, and you wouldn't know how to define evil accordingly.

So, you are both WRONG. Morality does come from Yahuwah as it is a by-product of free will. Free will is the nature of being in the image, which is from Yahuwah, therefore, again, we are His imagers!

You cannot get around that. To say morality "social mores" are outside Yahuwah as Ginger speaks of, is silly, as you're only left ascribing morality to the sovereignty of man.
Where did these laws come from?

Anaiah Priel (Andrew P) Carlson said:
the laws of logic exist apart from Yahuwah. The same with the laws of morality. Yahuwah can create specific laws and he certainly has done that. but the morality behind those laws He cannot create. Yahuwah could never make blasphemy a morally good thing. You could say the laws of morality and the laws of logic are a part of who Yahuwah is, or as you say, Yahuwah IS the moral and logic laws. But to say that Yahuwah created the laws would be in error. Sure I can agree that Yahuwah is the laws of morality and logic. That I don't really take issue with. I take issue with laws being created arbitrarily.

And I agree, doing is what is the highest of value. As the Epistle of James says, faith without works is dead. Shalom.
Shma Yisrael !

YHWH Eloheinu, YHWH Echad.
There is only one God.
Monotheism is truth.
The only one close to worthy of being called God with capital G etc is YHWH.
Yeshua, the Angels, the Beney Elohim, all the Malakim, all things and creatures are subordinate and totally controlled by YHWH.
I will never abandon the word Monotheism for as long as I use the English language.

Through the indwelling of YHWH's Spirit, all creatures can become united to Him, in purpose, and finally in being.
Yeshua was the firstborn of all creation, the Word, the physical vessel through which YHWH most often speaks and "appears", and also the first to rise from the dead.
Yeshua has grown and been glorified and inherited his Father's Name, as the Scriptures say.
There is no eternity apart from YHWH. Prove this, Anaiah, the existence of anything separate from YHWH. I contend you cannot. YHWH created everything, nothing is that He did not INTENTIONALLY, and from His outside-of-time perspective, create to SERVE HIS PURPOSE.
No law that does not serve His purpose exists. Even Satan, death and sin serve His purpose. They did not originate by themselves, neither did gravity nor morality.

You are in deep error, I believe I can easily prove this, but whether or not you accept my points I feel compelled to point out your heresy simply for the record. I will very clearly take a stand against this lie, not against you, but against this lie, so that later there shall be no doubt what my opinion was.

Anaiah Priel (Andrew P) Carlson said:
the laws are either eternally apart from Yahuwah, or they are a part of Yahuwah. Its like asking where did Yahuwah come from. He always was. Yahuwah is eternal. Likewise, the laws of logic and morality are eternal, either being eternal because they are eternally a part of Yahuwah, or eternal apart from Yahuwah.
Anaiah, not one of the versions you have of John 3:13 have anything about Yeoshua allegedly simultaneously being in heaven and on earth simultaneously. Fail.
Well of course! Yehoshua had wisdom to know that His words would be written down so that by the time the reader would read it, He of course would be back in the Heavens as He said he would GO TO the Father. And another way to look at it is He was identifying His usual residency. Your verse still does not prove any such simultaneous placement of being in heaven and on earth at the same time, otherwise Yahuchanan 14:1-4 would not make any sense.

Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in YHWH, believe in Me also. In my Abbah's house are many staying places; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to make ready a place for you. And if I go, and make ready a place for you, I will return and receive ye to myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. (Yahuchanan 14:1-3 Abrahamic Faith Nazarene Study Scriptures).

If He was allegedly simultaneously both here and there, then He could not go. nor could He return, nor could he specify where you could be with Him also. And don't forget the gigantic subject-object distinction in verse 1 where he says to believe in Him ALSO in addition to YHWH His Father!

Anaiah Priel (Andrew P) Carlson said:
John 3:13 "No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven."
The Son of Man on earth is saying this. The Son of Man on earth is saying that the Son of Man is currently in heaven, even though, Yahushua is the Son of Man and on earth currently, not in heaven as He claims to be. you are really ignorant for you are ignoring my clear reference to the possibility that the laws are eternal because they are a part of Yahuwah.

this is what I most recently said: "the laws are either eternally apart from Yahuwah, or THEY ARE A PART OF YAHUWAH. Its like asking where did Yahuwah come from. He always was. Yahuwah is eternal. Likewise, the laws of logic and morality are eternal, either being ETERNAL BECAUSE THEY ARE ETERNALLY A PART OF YAHUWAH, or eternal apart from Yahuwah."
No it does not. And I had already demonstrated that He spoke it with the reader in mind knowing that by the time the reader read it, that He would indeed be with the Father. It also seems that the older manuscripts possibly don't have the "is in heaven" phrase. By the way, you are still not dealing with Yahuchanan 14:1-4.

Anaiah Priel (Andrew P) Carlson said:
your translation is different. the english translations i cited demonstrate that Messiah is saying that the Son of Man is currently in heaven at the time He is speaking that quote.

"the Son of Man who is in heaven." who IS in heaven. not who was in heaven.
Yehoshua is not ever recorded as talking to Himself. He (the Son) talks to His Father. Son and Father are two distinct Beings-- that is the most simple and direct understanding.

Anaiah Priel (Andrew P) Carlson said:
perhaps you are right about John 3:13. Messiah is separate from the Father because He has entered our timeline. So, essentially, we have Messiah in temporal time interacting with HIs eternal self that eternally exists at all times. So, essentially, He can be in two times at once, and Messiah who is in a different time communicates with His eternal self that exists in another time, the eternal now.
exactly, Yaacov...and that is precisely why Jews reject the idea.

Yaacov said:
Yehoshua is not ever recorded as talking to Himself. He (the Son) talks to His Father. Son and Father are two distinct Beings-- that is the most simple and direct understanding.

Anaiah Priel (Andrew P) Carlson said:
perhaps you are right about John 3:13. Messiah is separate from the Father because He has entered our timeline. So, essentially, we have Messiah in temporal time interacting with HIs eternal self that eternally exists at all times. So, essentially, He can be in two times at once, and Messiah who is in a different time communicates with His eternal self that exists in another time, the eternal now.
I agree with Joseph's idea of the Malak bearing the HaShem - I believe the pre-incarnate Messiah, the Word, was this Malak YHWH, bearing the name and containing the Ruach, being the spokesperson and for all intents and purposes executor of YHWH's will, as this Malak has no will of his own other than the will of the Father.

Writings like the Jerusalem Targums etc are very vocal in showing the Malak YHWH as a messenger through which YHWH Himself speaks, almost as though the angelic body were a speaking vessel, to make another strange analogy.

The angel appears and does the physical deeds, is responsible for the outpouring of soundwaves (being physical), but the voice is controlled by, and thus the speech totally determined by YHWH. Yah's words come out of the mouth as though this body speaking, really is His body. But it ultimately isnt His body, more than he can be born, die or created, as a body can be.

The great angelic messenger, Yahushua, INHERITED his Father's Name as Scripture says, he grew and learned and was glorified with time, attaining attributes he did not have before. He never had faults or flaws, he simply grew, without this implying a flaw.
A tree can be 100%, healthy and still grow more, believe it or not.

Through the indwelling of the Ruach HaQodesh, Yahushua became "one with God", first in essence, then on a deeper level, and this very same process applies to all of us.

Yahushua the Word was the the firstborn of all creation, the first to rise from the dead, and the vessel through which YHWH speaks.

Though Yahushua may have (had) a separate will of his own, he never follows it, and always does the will of the Father instead. He tentatively prayed "Let this cup pass from me" but was ultimately in sacred submission by affirming "if it be Thy will".
Let's do some math:

A:"Oneness rejects all concepts of a subordination, duality,..."
+ A:"Oneness doctrine declares that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God."
_______________________________________________________________________________
SUM: A BIG FAT ZERO BECAUSE THE TWO CONCEPTS ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE

Especially when speaking of Eternal BeingS!

Regarding Yeshayahu 9:6

Question: Who were most translations of Isaiah 9:6 made by?
Answer: Trinitarian Christians
Question: What is the conflict of interest?
Answer: Trinitarian Christianity has no concern with resolving when subject-object dinstinctions conflict with dubious translations they chalk it all up to being "a mystery."

A Note from Patriarchinity chapter 7 regarding Yeshayahu 9:6 (adapted from The Virgin Birth by Yoseph Viel)
6 For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given: and the
government shall be upon His shoulder: and His Name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The Mighty-El, Awb Ad, The Prince of Shalom.

The typical translation of Awb Ad as "Everlasting Father" is not accurate.

The phrase in question can be translated several ways. Awb can mean "Father" or "origin". Ad can mean "eternity" or "witness". So the possible translations are...

Father of Eternity
Origin of Eternity
Originator of Eternity
Father of Witness
Origin of Witness
Fatherly Witness
My Father is a Witness
My Father is forever

The translations that verify the necessary distinctions between Father and Son all through out Scripture are more accurate.

Regarding 1 Qorint'yah 8:6 (AFNHSS)
But to us there is but one YHWH the Abba, of who are all things, AND one Master Yehoshua, by who are all things, and we by him.

Notice the word "AND"?
There is one Father AND one Master Yehoshua. Who is the Father, directly Father to? His Son. Who is the Master Yehoshua Son to? His Father. When a Father and Child are mentioned, then Mother is implicit.

Yahuchannan 14:7-10 (AFNHSS)
"If you had known Me, you should have known my Abbah also; and from henceforth you know Him, and have seen Him," Phillip said to Him,"Show us the Abba and it is sufficient for us." Yehoshua said to him, " Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Phillip? He that has seen Me has seen the Abbah; and how do you say then, 'Show us the Abbah?'" Do you not believe that I am in the Abbah, and the Abbah in Me? The words that I speak to you I speak not of my self; but the Abbah that dwells in me, He does the works. Believe me that I am in the Abbah, and the Abbah in me: or else velieve me for the very works'sake."

Yehoshua being "in the Abba" and the "Abba being in" Yehoshua are idioms explaining the akhad-ness of their BeingS= harmony, no disagreements. It does not mean that they are the same Being.
Then when Yehoshua credits the Abba for the words He speaks, that is an idiom expressing the super-ordination of the Father and the subordnination of the Son. To take it literally wooden is to ignore all of the remaining SUBJECT-OBJECT DISTINCTIONS in the rest of the chapter and throughout the rest of Scripture.
What Jews?
Athiestic Jews?, Bhuddist Jews?, Hindu Jews? Roman Catholic Jews? Satanic Jews? Wiccan Jews? New-Age Jews? Agnostic Jews? You act as if one ethnic group or more specifically one tribe of one ethnic group has somehow had a monolithic theological consensus. Patently absurd.

And what idea?

You are forgetting that there were a significant number of Nazarene Jews who did believe in the PowerS. The Henotheism of the Nazarene Jews is why the unbelieving Jews rejected the Nazarenes, and it is also why the Ebionites rejected the Nazarenes. I'm siding with the "rejects".

ginger said:
exactly, Yaacov...and that is precisely why Jews reject the idea.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service