Post by iris89 on Jan 18, 2006 21:03:48 GMT -5
Does the Apostle Thomas' exclamation at John 20:28 prove that Jesus is truly God (YHWH)?
Let's reason together on John 20:27-29, " then he saith to Thomas, 'Bring thy finger hither, and see my hands, and bring thy hand, and put it to my side, and become not unbelieving, but believing.' 28 And Thomas answered and said to him, 'My Lord and my God;' 29 Jesus saith to him, 'Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed; happy those not having seen, and having believed.'" (Young's Literal Translation; YLT).
There is no objection to referring to Jesus (Yeshua) as "god," if this is what Thomas had in mind at his startlement. Such would be in harmony with Jesus' (Yeshua's) own quotation from the Psalms in which powerful men, judges, were addressed as "gods," per John 10:33-35, " The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;" (Authorized King James Version; AV); and at Psalms 82:1-6, " <<A Psalm of Asaph.>> God standeth in the congregation of God; He judgeth among the gods. 2 How long will ye judge unjustly, And respect the persons of the wicked? [[Selah
3 Judge the poor and fatherless: Do justice to the afflicted and destitute. 4 Rescue the poor and needy: Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked. 5 They know not, neither do they understand; They walk to and fro in darkness: All the foundations of the earth are shaken. 6 ΒΆ I said, Ye are gods, And all of you sons of the Most High."(American Standard Version; ASV). Of course, Christ occupies a position far higher than such men. Because of the uniqueness of his position in relation to God Almighty (YHWH), as shown at John 1:18, " No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (ASV), Jesus (yeshua) is referred to as "the only-begotten god." Isaiah 9:6 also prophetically describes jesus (Yeshua) as "Mighty God," but not as the Almighty God (YHWH). All of this in in harmony with Jesus' (Yeshua's) being described as "a god," or "divine," at John 1:1, for details for those interested, (It should be noted that the text itself shows that the Word "was with God," therefore as previously stated could NOT be God. Additionally, the word for 'god' (Gr., the-os) in its second occurrence in the verse is significantly without the definite article 'the' (Gr. , ho) . Ernst Haenchen, in a commentary of the Gospel of John, stated: "(the-os') and (ho the-os') ('god, divine' and 'the God') were not the same thing in this period in keeping with what Dr. J. J. Griesbach stated in his writings. Thus only the Father (YHWH) was 'God' (ho the-os') as in John 17:3, "And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, `even' Jesus Christ." (ASV); here, the Son was subordinate to him, a fact Jesus (Yeshua) himself testified to at John 14:28, "Ye heard how I said to you, I go away, and I come unto you. If ye loved me, ye would have rejoiced, because I go unto the Father: for the Father is greater than I." (ASV). Remember in Jewish and Christian monotheism it is quite acceptable to speak of divine beings that existed alongside and under God (YHWh), but were not identical with him as shown at Philippians 2:6-10, "who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient `even' unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of `things' in heaven and `things' on earth and `things' under the earth," (ASV). In this passage the Apostle Paul delineates just such a divine being, the obedient Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua). Therefore, in both Philippians and John 1:1 it is not a matter of a dialectical relationship between two-in-one, but of a personal union of two entities. [source of paraphrase, John, translated by R. W. Funk, 1984, Page 109-110].
How examples of some Bible translators who did not have bias translated: "When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the word was." [Note, to conserve space only the last part of the scripture as rendered will be given for the many translations to follow] "and the Word was a divine being." "La Bible du Centenaire" by L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel, "and the Word was divine." The Bible-An American Translation by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, "and of a divine kind was the Word." "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme, "and the Word was a God." The New Testament by James L. Tomanek, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" Siegfried Schulz, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Johannes Schneider, Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Jurgen Becker Harwood, "what God was,the Word was" by J. Moffatt, "the Logos was divine" Translator's NT, "The Word was with God and shared his nature" Barclay NT, "what God was, the Word was" Scholar's Version, "The Divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was" Madsen, "the Word was a divine Being" Becker, "ein Gott war das Logos" " Stage, "Das Wort war selbst gttlichen Wesens" [The Word/word was itself a divine Being/being]" Bhmer, "Es war fest mit Gott verbunden, ja selbst gttlichen Wesens" [It was strongly linked to God, yes itself divine Being/being]" Thimme, "Gott von Art war das Wort" [God of Kind/kind was the Word/word] Baumgarten et al, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] Holzmann, "ein Gott war der Gedanke" Rittenlmeyer, "selbst ein Gott war das Wort" [itsel***od/god was the Word/word] Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), "Ordet var av guddomsart" [the Word was of divine kind] Pffflin, "war von gttlicher Wucht [was of divine Kind/kind] Albrecht, "gttlichen Wesen hatte das Wort" [godlike Being/being had the Word/word] Smit, "verdensordet var et guddommelig vesen" [the word of the world was a divine being] Menge, "Gott (- gttlichen Wesens) war das Wort"[God(-godlike Being/being) was the Word/word) Haenchen, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, "r war bei Gott und in allem Gott gleich"[He was with God and in all like God] Haenchen (tr. By R. Funk), "divine (of the category divinity)was the Logos" Schultz, "And the word was a god" - The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, "and a god was the Word" - The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, "And the Word was a god" - New World Translation, "He was the same as God" - Today's English Version. We notice that these Bibles do not translate John 1:1 with the simple expression "The Word was God" like most Bibles do. Why is that? The footnote to John 1:1 in The New American Bible states the following reason: "Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification." What the footnote is saying is that first time "God" appears in the verse, "was with God", there is a definite article before God so it literally reads "was with THE God". The second time God appears, "was God," there is no definite article (the). This signifies "God" may be used as a predicate and not as an identification. Regarding this fact, the Anchor Bible states: "To preserve in English the different nuance of theos [god] with and without the article, some (Moffat) would translate 'The Word was divine.'"
[for those wishing to do further research on the subject, the following references are highly recommended: The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound by Anthony F. Buzzard and Charles F. Hunting, "The Two Babylons" by Rev. Alexander Hilsop, "The Great Debate Regarding The Father, Son & Holy Spirit" by Roger Wagner, "Jesus-God or the Son of God?" by Brian Holt- www.tellway-publishing.com, "The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation" by Rolf Furuli-one Of the two greatest living Koine Greek experts, "The Religious Life of Ancient Rome: A Study in the Development of Religious Consciousness, from the Foundation of the City Until the Death of Gregory the Great." Carter, Jesse Benedict, New York: Cooper Square Publishers. 1972; David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, "De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitone" [Latin](The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son, and Holy spirit), David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, 1566 A.D.; hector3000.future.easyspa...ermans.htm , "The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine." By Cher-El L Hagensick, "The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity", James Parkes-1960, "Caesar and Christ" check page 595,(Lamson, Newton & Durant cited from Charles Redeker, To Us there is One God, June 1978); "The Paganism in Our Christianity" by Historian Arthur Weigall, "Anyone who can worship a trinity and insist that his religion is a monotheism can believe anything." "The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition" (100-600). Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1971. Vol. 1 of "The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine." 5 vols. By Robert A. Heinlein; Pelikan, Jaroslav, "The Writings of Thomas Jefferson: Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and Private: Published by the Order of the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library, From the Original Manuscripts, Deposited in the Department of State, with explanatory notes, by the editor, H.A. Washington." 9 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Taylor & Maury, 1853-1854); now if you doubt anything I have written with respect "Contention With Regard A Myth." Now some Discourses by Iris the Preacher you can use to do research: Discourse on Mainstream Religion, Westminister Confession an Example of Twisting by Use of Heremeneutic Methodology to Back Up a Myth/False Doctrine, Discourse on Colossians 2:8-12, Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti-Trinitarian, Discourse on Constructs Used to Translate John 1:1, Discourse on the Great Deceit, Paul and the Trinity, Discourse on Philippians 2:1-16,; And one by my husband, Discourse on John 1:1 & Appendix. Now please go check the facts, I have given you sufficient research sources.]) [source - "Documentary on Our Savior Jesus (Yeshua)," by Iris the Preacher, 2004].
The contest helps us to draw the right conclusion from all this. Shortly before Jesus' (Yeshua's) death, Thomas had heard Jesus" (Yeshua's) prayer in which he addressed his Father (YHWH) as "the only true God" at John 17:1-5, " When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven and said, "Father, the hour has come; glorify thy Son that the Son may glorify thee, 2 since thou hast given him power over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom thou hast given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. 4 I glorified thee on earth, having accomplished the work which thou gavest me to do; 5 and now, Father, glorify thou me in thy own presence with the glory which I had with thee before the world was made. " (Revised Standard Version: RSV). After recording what Thomas said when he actually saw and touched the resurrected Christ, the Apostle John stated at John 20:31, " but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." (RSV). So, if anyone has concluded from Thomas' exclamation that Jesus (Yeshua) is himself "the only true God" or that Jesus (Yeshua) is a Trinitarian "God the Son," he needs to look again at what Jesus (Yeshua) said at John 20:17, " Jesus said to her, "Do not hold me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." (RSV), and at the conclusion previously quoted that clearly states the situation and at John 5:19, "Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner."(ASV) where Jesus (Yeshua) clearly testifies that he, the Son, can "do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing" which leaves no doubt that Jesus (Yeshua) and Jehovah (YHWH), the Father (YHWH) are indeed two separate individuals.
One individual once said, "Some have a problem dealing with what is written concerning the Son and the fact that the NT writers call Him God, Paul calling Him the GREAT God and Savior." which is an incorrect statement meant to cover the fact of their own error; the fact is that the New Testament writers NEVER referred to Jesus (Yeshua) as Almighty God (YHWH), but as the Son of God (YHWH) in over 40 different places. However, some translators mistranslated, for example John 1:1, to make it seem like he was God (YHWH), but a close examination of their mistranslation of John 1:1 clearly shows there is a definite problem as their mistranslation creates an impossible situation. Let's look at John 1:1 and see why this is the case, "In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and the Word was God." (Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB). Now this first says [in the first part of the translational construct] that the "Word was with God," and then [in the second part of the translational construct] that the "Word was God." Obviously you CAN NOT BE BOTH WITH SOMEONE AND BE THAT SOMEONE. This is both impossible and absolutely ridiculas at the same time, and this all the more so when you consider John 1:2, "The same was in the beginning with God." (DRCB).
Thus you can easily see there is something very wrong with this translation and it could IN NO WAY be the thoughts of the original writer, and of course you would be correct. But now what were the thoughts of the original writer? The New English Bible (NEB) captures the thoughts of the original writer as follows for John 1:1-3, "When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was. The Word, then, was with God at the beginning, and through him all things came to be; no single thing was created without him." (The New English Bible; NEB) or in the translation by the renown American translator, An American Translation," by Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed - transltr, J. M. Powis Smith - transltr. Publisher: University of Chicago Press, "IN THE beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine. It was he that was with God in the beginning. Everything came into existence through him, and apart from him nothing came to be." (An American Translation; AAT). Both clearly showing that he was what his father was a diety or divine; but clearly not on the same level with his Father (YHWH) since as he himself said at John 14:28, " You have heard that I said to you: I go away, and I come unto you. If you loved me you would indeed be glad, because I go to the Father: for the Father is greater than I." (DRCB); thus no violation of Exodus 20:3 against polytheism, "Thou shalt not have strange gods before me." (DRCB). And as God's (YHWH's) he showed where worship should be directed in Matthew 4:10 when he was giving an answer to the Devil on worship and to whom it should be given, "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (American Standard Version; ASV), and this is in keeping with Isaiah 42:8, "I am Jehovah, that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise unto graven images." (ASV). Jesus (Yeshua) even showed that his own glory was subordinate to his Father's (YHWH's) and dependent on his Father (YHWH) at John 17:1-5, "These things spake Jesus; and lifting up his eyes to heaven, he said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that the son may glorify thee: 2 even as thou gavest him authority over all flesh, that to all whom thou hast given him, he should give eternal life. 3 And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, [even] Jesus Christ. 4 I glorified thee on the earth, having accomplished the work which thou hast given me to do. 5 And now, Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (ASV). So we can clearly see that Jesus (Yeshua) and His Father (YHWH) must be two separate and distinct individuals as there is NO POSSIBLE WAY THEY COULD BE ONE INDIVIDUAL, since one is dependent on the other for his power, this being the Son, Jesus (Yeshua) who is dependent on his Father (YHWH) who is greater than he is.
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
Let's reason together on John 20:27-29, " then he saith to Thomas, 'Bring thy finger hither, and see my hands, and bring thy hand, and put it to my side, and become not unbelieving, but believing.' 28 And Thomas answered and said to him, 'My Lord and my God;' 29 Jesus saith to him, 'Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed; happy those not having seen, and having believed.'" (Young's Literal Translation; YLT).
There is no objection to referring to Jesus (Yeshua) as "god," if this is what Thomas had in mind at his startlement. Such would be in harmony with Jesus' (Yeshua's) own quotation from the Psalms in which powerful men, judges, were addressed as "gods," per John 10:33-35, " The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;" (Authorized King James Version; AV); and at Psalms 82:1-6, " <<A Psalm of Asaph.>> God standeth in the congregation of God; He judgeth among the gods. 2 How long will ye judge unjustly, And respect the persons of the wicked? [[Selah
3 Judge the poor and fatherless: Do justice to the afflicted and destitute. 4 Rescue the poor and needy: Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked. 5 They know not, neither do they understand; They walk to and fro in darkness: All the foundations of the earth are shaken. 6 ΒΆ I said, Ye are gods, And all of you sons of the Most High."(American Standard Version; ASV). Of course, Christ occupies a position far higher than such men. Because of the uniqueness of his position in relation to God Almighty (YHWH), as shown at John 1:18, " No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (ASV), Jesus (yeshua) is referred to as "the only-begotten god." Isaiah 9:6 also prophetically describes jesus (Yeshua) as "Mighty God," but not as the Almighty God (YHWH). All of this in in harmony with Jesus' (Yeshua's) being described as "a god," or "divine," at John 1:1, for details for those interested, (It should be noted that the text itself shows that the Word "was with God," therefore as previously stated could NOT be God. Additionally, the word for 'god' (Gr., the-os) in its second occurrence in the verse is significantly without the definite article 'the' (Gr. , ho) . Ernst Haenchen, in a commentary of the Gospel of John, stated: "(the-os') and (ho the-os') ('god, divine' and 'the God') were not the same thing in this period in keeping with what Dr. J. J. Griesbach stated in his writings. Thus only the Father (YHWH) was 'God' (ho the-os') as in John 17:3, "And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, `even' Jesus Christ." (ASV); here, the Son was subordinate to him, a fact Jesus (Yeshua) himself testified to at John 14:28, "Ye heard how I said to you, I go away, and I come unto you. If ye loved me, ye would have rejoiced, because I go unto the Father: for the Father is greater than I." (ASV). Remember in Jewish and Christian monotheism it is quite acceptable to speak of divine beings that existed alongside and under God (YHWh), but were not identical with him as shown at Philippians 2:6-10, "who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient `even' unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of `things' in heaven and `things' on earth and `things' under the earth," (ASV). In this passage the Apostle Paul delineates just such a divine being, the obedient Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua). Therefore, in both Philippians and John 1:1 it is not a matter of a dialectical relationship between two-in-one, but of a personal union of two entities. [source of paraphrase, John, translated by R. W. Funk, 1984, Page 109-110].
How examples of some Bible translators who did not have bias translated: "When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the word was." [Note, to conserve space only the last part of the scripture as rendered will be given for the many translations to follow] "and the Word was a divine being." "La Bible du Centenaire" by L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel, "and the Word was divine." The Bible-An American Translation by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, "and of a divine kind was the Word." "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme, "and the Word was a God." The New Testament by James L. Tomanek, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" Siegfried Schulz, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Johannes Schneider, Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Jurgen Becker Harwood, "what God was,the Word was" by J. Moffatt, "the Logos was divine" Translator's NT, "The Word was with God and shared his nature" Barclay NT, "what God was, the Word was" Scholar's Version, "The Divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was" Madsen, "the Word was a divine Being" Becker, "ein Gott war das Logos" " Stage, "Das Wort war selbst gttlichen Wesens" [The Word/word was itself a divine Being/being]" Bhmer, "Es war fest mit Gott verbunden, ja selbst gttlichen Wesens" [It was strongly linked to God, yes itself divine Being/being]" Thimme, "Gott von Art war das Wort" [God of Kind/kind was the Word/word] Baumgarten et al, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] Holzmann, "ein Gott war der Gedanke" Rittenlmeyer, "selbst ein Gott war das Wort" [itsel***od/god was the Word/word] Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), "Ordet var av guddomsart" [the Word was of divine kind] Pffflin, "war von gttlicher Wucht [was of divine Kind/kind] Albrecht, "gttlichen Wesen hatte das Wort" [godlike Being/being had the Word/word] Smit, "verdensordet var et guddommelig vesen" [the word of the world was a divine being] Menge, "Gott (- gttlichen Wesens) war das Wort"[God(-godlike Being/being) was the Word/word) Haenchen, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, "r war bei Gott und in allem Gott gleich"[He was with God and in all like God] Haenchen (tr. By R. Funk), "divine (of the category divinity)was the Logos" Schultz, "And the word was a god" - The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, "and a god was the Word" - The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, "And the Word was a god" - New World Translation, "He was the same as God" - Today's English Version. We notice that these Bibles do not translate John 1:1 with the simple expression "The Word was God" like most Bibles do. Why is that? The footnote to John 1:1 in The New American Bible states the following reason: "Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification." What the footnote is saying is that first time "God" appears in the verse, "was with God", there is a definite article before God so it literally reads "was with THE God". The second time God appears, "was God," there is no definite article (the). This signifies "God" may be used as a predicate and not as an identification. Regarding this fact, the Anchor Bible states: "To preserve in English the different nuance of theos [god] with and without the article, some (Moffat) would translate 'The Word was divine.'"
[for those wishing to do further research on the subject, the following references are highly recommended: The Doctrine of the Trinity: Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound by Anthony F. Buzzard and Charles F. Hunting, "The Two Babylons" by Rev. Alexander Hilsop, "The Great Debate Regarding The Father, Son & Holy Spirit" by Roger Wagner, "Jesus-God or the Son of God?" by Brian Holt- www.tellway-publishing.com, "The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation" by Rolf Furuli-one Of the two greatest living Koine Greek experts, "The Religious Life of Ancient Rome: A Study in the Development of Religious Consciousness, from the Foundation of the City Until the Death of Gregory the Great." Carter, Jesse Benedict, New York: Cooper Square Publishers. 1972; David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, "De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitone" [Latin](The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son, and Holy spirit), David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, 1566 A.D.; hector3000.future.easyspa...ermans.htm , "The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine." By Cher-El L Hagensick, "The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity", James Parkes-1960, "Caesar and Christ" check page 595,(Lamson, Newton & Durant cited from Charles Redeker, To Us there is One God, June 1978); "The Paganism in Our Christianity" by Historian Arthur Weigall, "Anyone who can worship a trinity and insist that his religion is a monotheism can believe anything." "The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition" (100-600). Chicago: U of Chicago P. 1971. Vol. 1 of "The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine." 5 vols. By Robert A. Heinlein; Pelikan, Jaroslav, "The Writings of Thomas Jefferson: Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and Private: Published by the Order of the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library, From the Original Manuscripts, Deposited in the Department of State, with explanatory notes, by the editor, H.A. Washington." 9 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Taylor & Maury, 1853-1854); now if you doubt anything I have written with respect "Contention With Regard A Myth." Now some Discourses by Iris the Preacher you can use to do research: Discourse on Mainstream Religion, Westminister Confession an Example of Twisting by Use of Heremeneutic Methodology to Back Up a Myth/False Doctrine, Discourse on Colossians 2:8-12, Documentary on the Book of John Being Anti-Trinitarian, Discourse on Constructs Used to Translate John 1:1, Discourse on the Great Deceit, Paul and the Trinity, Discourse on Philippians 2:1-16,; And one by my husband, Discourse on John 1:1 & Appendix. Now please go check the facts, I have given you sufficient research sources.]) [source - "Documentary on Our Savior Jesus (Yeshua)," by Iris the Preacher, 2004].
The contest helps us to draw the right conclusion from all this. Shortly before Jesus' (Yeshua's) death, Thomas had heard Jesus" (Yeshua's) prayer in which he addressed his Father (YHWH) as "the only true God" at John 17:1-5, " When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven and said, "Father, the hour has come; glorify thy Son that the Son may glorify thee, 2 since thou hast given him power over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom thou hast given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. 4 I glorified thee on earth, having accomplished the work which thou gavest me to do; 5 and now, Father, glorify thou me in thy own presence with the glory which I had with thee before the world was made. " (Revised Standard Version: RSV). After recording what Thomas said when he actually saw and touched the resurrected Christ, the Apostle John stated at John 20:31, " but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." (RSV). So, if anyone has concluded from Thomas' exclamation that Jesus (Yeshua) is himself "the only true God" or that Jesus (Yeshua) is a Trinitarian "God the Son," he needs to look again at what Jesus (Yeshua) said at John 20:17, " Jesus said to her, "Do not hold me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." (RSV), and at the conclusion previously quoted that clearly states the situation and at John 5:19, "Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner."(ASV) where Jesus (Yeshua) clearly testifies that he, the Son, can "do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing" which leaves no doubt that Jesus (Yeshua) and Jehovah (YHWH), the Father (YHWH) are indeed two separate individuals.
One individual once said, "Some have a problem dealing with what is written concerning the Son and the fact that the NT writers call Him God, Paul calling Him the GREAT God and Savior." which is an incorrect statement meant to cover the fact of their own error; the fact is that the New Testament writers NEVER referred to Jesus (Yeshua) as Almighty God (YHWH), but as the Son of God (YHWH) in over 40 different places. However, some translators mistranslated, for example John 1:1, to make it seem like he was God (YHWH), but a close examination of their mistranslation of John 1:1 clearly shows there is a definite problem as their mistranslation creates an impossible situation. Let's look at John 1:1 and see why this is the case, "In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and the Word was God." (Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB). Now this first says [in the first part of the translational construct] that the "Word was with God," and then [in the second part of the translational construct] that the "Word was God." Obviously you CAN NOT BE BOTH WITH SOMEONE AND BE THAT SOMEONE. This is both impossible and absolutely ridiculas at the same time, and this all the more so when you consider John 1:2, "The same was in the beginning with God." (DRCB).
Thus you can easily see there is something very wrong with this translation and it could IN NO WAY be the thoughts of the original writer, and of course you would be correct. But now what were the thoughts of the original writer? The New English Bible (NEB) captures the thoughts of the original writer as follows for John 1:1-3, "When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was. The Word, then, was with God at the beginning, and through him all things came to be; no single thing was created without him." (The New English Bible; NEB) or in the translation by the renown American translator, An American Translation," by Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed - transltr, J. M. Powis Smith - transltr. Publisher: University of Chicago Press, "IN THE beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine. It was he that was with God in the beginning. Everything came into existence through him, and apart from him nothing came to be." (An American Translation; AAT). Both clearly showing that he was what his father was a diety or divine; but clearly not on the same level with his Father (YHWH) since as he himself said at John 14:28, " You have heard that I said to you: I go away, and I come unto you. If you loved me you would indeed be glad, because I go to the Father: for the Father is greater than I." (DRCB); thus no violation of Exodus 20:3 against polytheism, "Thou shalt not have strange gods before me." (DRCB). And as God's (YHWH's) he showed where worship should be directed in Matthew 4:10 when he was giving an answer to the Devil on worship and to whom it should be given, "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (American Standard Version; ASV), and this is in keeping with Isaiah 42:8, "I am Jehovah, that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise unto graven images." (ASV). Jesus (Yeshua) even showed that his own glory was subordinate to his Father's (YHWH's) and dependent on his Father (YHWH) at John 17:1-5, "These things spake Jesus; and lifting up his eyes to heaven, he said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that the son may glorify thee: 2 even as thou gavest him authority over all flesh, that to all whom thou hast given him, he should give eternal life. 3 And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, [even] Jesus Christ. 4 I glorified thee on the earth, having accomplished the work which thou hast given me to do. 5 And now, Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (ASV). So we can clearly see that Jesus (Yeshua) and His Father (YHWH) must be two separate and distinct individuals as there is NO POSSIBLE WAY THEY COULD BE ONE INDIVIDUAL, since one is dependent on the other for his power, this being the Son, Jesus (Yeshua) who is dependent on his Father (YHWH) who is greater than he is.
Your Friend in Christ Iris89