abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
i agree renak, people have a tendency to wanna take control, at that time even more so, so they will change the word of GOD to fit their likings
If Jesus Was God Then...
- Thread starter sonz
- Start date
- Replies 237
- Views 28K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | PHP 8.4 patch for vBulletin 4.2.5
Cheb
Elite Member
- Messages
- 441
- Reaction score
- 44
- Religion
- Islam
Then how can you follow something that mankind has tampered with rather than God's words. I mean all these disagreements and contradictions are the cause of man tampering with God's words. You are bound to have mistakes.
sevenxtrust
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 0
- Religion
- Christianity
Here are some Biblical proofs of the Trinity,,and man has not taken-away the Truth of Gods Holy Word. It is earthly logic that states man has changed the Word of God.
Genesis 1:26
"Let US make man in OUR image": Three plural pronouns, (We, Us, Our) used 6 different times in four different passages: Gen 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8. The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that the Father was talking to Jesus.
Genesis 19:24
"Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven. Genesis 19:24. In this text Abraham is visited by three individuals, one being Yahweh and the other two angels. Here we have God on the earth (Jesus) and God in heaven (father) sending down fire from heaven. This incident when Abraham met with Yahweh God, is what Jesus referred to when he said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." (John 8:56) The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that Jesus visited Abraham in Genesis 18 and 19.
Isaiah 6
Isaiah saw the glory of Yahweh, but John says that Isaiah really saw the glory of Christ. This proves Jesus is Yahweh. Combine this with the fact the Yahweh said, "Who will go for US" is a plural pronoun indicating more than one person in the Godhead.
Isaiah 40-55
Jesus echoes the "I AM" statements in Isaiah chapters 40-55. This spectacular link explores over 20 different passages in Isaiah and John.
Isaiah 45:23-24
I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. "They will say of Me, 'Only in the Lord are righteousness and strength.' Men will come to Him, And all who were angry at Him shall be put to shame.
Micah 5:2
But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.
New Testament Trinity Proof Texts
Mark 2:5-12
Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.
John 5:18
For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
John 8:58
"Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." The Jews therefore said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple.
John 10:33
"I and the Father are one." The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. … Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’?"
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
A simple reading of the context of John 12 makes it clear that John is saying that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus Christ himself in Isaiah 6. This proves Jesus is Yahweh.
John 19:7
The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God."
Romans 14:11
For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall give praise to God."
2 Corinthians 13:14
Philippians 2:1-2
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.
Philippians 2:9-11
"Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Revelation 22:3
"And there shall no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His bond-servants shall [latreuo] serve Him."
Jesus worshipped in the highest sense of "latreuo"
Genesis 1:26
"Let US make man in OUR image": Three plural pronouns, (We, Us, Our) used 6 different times in four different passages: Gen 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8. The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that the Father was talking to Jesus.
Genesis 19:24
"Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven. Genesis 19:24. In this text Abraham is visited by three individuals, one being Yahweh and the other two angels. Here we have God on the earth (Jesus) and God in heaven (father) sending down fire from heaven. This incident when Abraham met with Yahweh God, is what Jesus referred to when he said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." (John 8:56) The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that Jesus visited Abraham in Genesis 18 and 19.
Isaiah 6
Isaiah saw the glory of Yahweh, but John says that Isaiah really saw the glory of Christ. This proves Jesus is Yahweh. Combine this with the fact the Yahweh said, "Who will go for US" is a plural pronoun indicating more than one person in the Godhead.
Isaiah 40-55
Jesus echoes the "I AM" statements in Isaiah chapters 40-55. This spectacular link explores over 20 different passages in Isaiah and John.
Isaiah 45:23-24
I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. "They will say of Me, 'Only in the Lord are righteousness and strength.' Men will come to Him, And all who were angry at Him shall be put to shame.
Micah 5:2
But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.
New Testament Trinity Proof Texts
Mark 2:5-12
Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?
John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.
John 5:18
For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
John 8:58
"Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." The Jews therefore said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple.
John 10:33
"I and the Father are one." The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. … Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’?"
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
A simple reading of the context of John 12 makes it clear that John is saying that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus Christ himself in Isaiah 6. This proves Jesus is Yahweh.
John 19:7
The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God."
Romans 14:11
For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall give praise to God."
2 Corinthians 13:14
Philippians 2:1-2
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.
Philippians 2:9-11
"Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Revelation 22:3
"And there shall no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His bond-servants shall [latreuo] serve Him."
Jesus worshipped in the highest sense of "latreuo"
Last edited:
abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
lol seven i just wanted to say none of these proves trinity, its misinterpreted
when they say us or we....... also in the quran it says we and so forth,
Allah = Always singular - Never plural
* "We" is used only as the "Royal WE" just as in English for royalty[/b
when they say us or we....... also in the quran it says we and so forth,
Allah = Always singular - Never plural
* "We" is used only as the "Royal WE" just as in English for royalty[/b
sevenxtrust
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 0
- Religion
- Christianity
"Plural of Majesty", "pluralis majestaticus", "singular of intensity", the "Royal we".
God is one in unity, but three persons:
"Let US make man in OUR image". (Gen 1:26)
To those who think there is even a single example of the "Royal We" in scripture we say:
"We are not amused!"
Introduction:
A. What is the issue?
Anti-Trinitarians and Unitarians alike, try to explain away the plural references to God in the Old Testament: "Let US make man in OUR image". (Gen 1:26)
While Trinitarians expect to find such plural pronouns and verbs used in reference to God at face value, anti-Trinitarians fall all over themselves trying to find a way to avoid the obvious truth that there are three persons in the one God.
As we will see, all of the Anti-Trinitarian arguments are invalid leaving us with no other conclusion then the fact that God is a plurality of persons, just as the Biblical trinity teaches.
It is clear that these plural references to God in the Old Testament we hidden until fully revealed by Christ and his apostles with the proclamation of the deity of Jesus. Jews could look back and see Jesus there in Genesis!
B. Understanding the various terms used in this discussion:
Plural of Majesty comes from the Latin, "pluralis majestaticus" and is also known as "singular of intensity".
"Royal we" "we are not amused" (Queen Victoria)
C. History of the "Plural of Majesty" argument:
"We are not amused"
Queen Elizabeth 1st would not be amused...
about they way Anti-Trinitarians twist every plural reference to God as a mere "Royal We". After all, Elizabeth was a Trinitarian, and would not be one bit amused that her own words were being used to trash the very trinity she believed in! "Let US make man in OUR image" (Gen 1:26) cannot be "Plural of Majesty" because this poetic device did not even exist in scripture until after the Old Testament was completed. The apostolic fathers had never heard of "plural of majesty", much less believe it. They unanimously interpreted Gen 1:26 as the Father speaking to the Son.
There are no examples in the either the Old or New Testament of Plural of Majesty. At the end of this document, we refute 5 texts that anti-Trinitarian say contain Plural of Majesty.
The earliest we find this poetic device being used in about the 4th century during the Byzantine era.
Other cultures that lived during the time of Moses never used the plural "Elohim", the way the Bible does, but instead used the simple singular "el". This nicely silences two different sets of heretics: First, it silences the Bible trashing liberals, who falsely claim the plural "elohim" is a carry over from a previous polytheistic origin of Judaism. Second, it silences the anti-Trinitarians, who falsely claim "plural of majesty" was widespread in all cultures in history.
The "Royal We" was made most famous by Queen Victoria when a vulgar joke was told in her presence. When she replied, "we are not amused", she clearly intended to speak on behalf of the other ladies whom she knew were equally offended.
D. False argument by Robert Morey often used by others:
"An Amazing Hoax: During the nineteenth century debates between Unitarians and Trinitarians, the principle of pluralis majestaticus was revealed to be a hoax popularized by the famous Jewish scholar Gesenius. It became clear that he used it as a ruse de guerre against Christianity." (Robert Morey, The Trinity, p95)
William Gesenius wrote his lexicon in 1846 AD: The Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon (1846 AD) is a translation of the "Lexicon Manuale Hebraicum et Chaldaicum in Veteris Testamenti Libros," of Dr. William Gesenius, a Jewish scholar.
William Gesenius couldn’t be guilty of such a hoax, motivated by "a strategy of war", when the plural of majesty dates back to the 4th century! Even Calvin discussed the plural of majesty.
Morey, although a Trinitarian, is correct in his view that Plural of Majesty is never used in the Bible, but this argument is invalid and needs to be withdrawn. He shoots himself in the foot by creating a false argument to teach something that is otherwise true. We need to be careful.
E. What scholars say about "Plural of Majesty":
"Every one who is acquainted with the rudiments of the Hebrew and Chaldee languages, must know that God, in the holy Writings, very often spoke of Himself in the plural. The passages are numerous, in which, instead of a grammatical agreement between the subject and predicate, we meet with a construction, which some modern grammarians, who possess more of the so-called philosophical than of the real knowledge of the Oriental languages, call a pluralis excellentiae. This helps them out of every apparent difficulty. Such a pluralis excellentiae was, however, a thing unknown to Moses and the prophets. Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, David, and all the other kings, throughout TeNaKh (the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa) speak in the singular, and not as modern kings in the plural. They do not say we, but I, command; as in Gen. xli. 41; Dan. iii. 29; Ezra i. 2, etc." (Rabbi Tzvi Nassi, Oxford University professor, The Great Mystery, 1970, p6, )
"This first person plural can hardly be a mere editorial or royal plural that refers to the speaker alone, for no such usage is demonstrable anywhere else in biblical Hebrew. Therefore, we must face the question of who are included in this "us" and "our." It could hardly include the angels in consultation with God, for nowhere is it ever stated that man was created in the image of angels, only of God. Verse 27 then affirms: "and God [Elohim] created man in His own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female He created them" (NASB). God--the same God who spoke of Himself in the plural--now states that He created man in His image. In other words, the plural equals the singular. This can only be understood in terms of the Trinitarian nature of God. The one true God subsists in three Persons, Persons who are able to confer with one another and carry their plans into action together--without ceasing to be one God." (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Gleason Archer, p.359, commenting on whether Gen 1:26 is a "plural of majesty")
"The best answer that they [Old Hebrew lexicographers and grammarians] could give was that the plural form used for the name (or title) of God was the ‘pluralis majestatis,’ that is the plural of majesty…to say nothing of the fact that it is not at all certain that the ‘pluralis majestatis’ is ever found in the Old Testament, there is an explanation much nearer at hand and much simpler, and that is, that a plural name was used for the one God, in spite of the intense monotheism of the Jews, because there is a plurality of person in the one Godhead." (The God of the Bible, R. A.Torrey, 1923, p 64)
"Another very popular view in modem times is that God uses the plural, just as kings do, as a mark of dignity (the so-called "plural of majesty"), but it is only late in Jewish history that such a form of speech occurs, and then it is used by Persian and Greek rulers (Esdr. iv. 18; 1 Mace. x. 19). Nor can the plural be regarded as merely indicating the way in which God summons Himself to energy, for the use of the language is against this (Gen. ii. 18; Is. xxxiii. 10)." (Trinity, A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960, p 822-830)
E. What the apostolic Fathers say about Gen 1:26:
"The plural "We" was regarded by the fathers and earlier theologians almost unanimously as indicative of the Trinity" (Keil & Delitzsch, Genesis 1:26, Vol. 1, Page 38) Note: after observing that that the unanimous view of the apostolic Fathers was that "we" referred to the three persons of the trinity, he then rejects this and adopts the plural of majesty view. This is most unfortunate. If only he had known plural of majesty did not exist historically among the Jews until after the Old Testament was written in about 200 AD.)
180 AD Irenaeus "It was not angels, therefore, who made us, nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor any one else, except the Word of the Lord, nor any Power remotely distant from the Father of all things. For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishing of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, "Let Us make man after Our image and likeness; " [Gen. 1:26]" (Against Heresies 4:20:1).
I. Plural nouns and pronouns with singular verbs:
The easiest way to dismiss the argument that the plural pronouns applied to God can be explained as "Plural of Majesty" is to observe that the Hebrew has many examples of plural pronouns also being applied to single human individuals.
Plural of Majesty fails because we find plural references to both God and individual men.
If the Holy Spirit intended to use these plural references of God as "singular of intensity", then why does He intensify both creator and creation alike?
Obviously the, "Plural of Majesty" does not explain these plural references.
text
Plural noun
Singular verbs
Gen 1:1
Elohim (God)
created
Genesis 46:7
Sons, grandsons, daughters, granddaughters, descendants
brought
Judges 12:7
cities
Buried
Nehemiah 3:8
goldsmiths
Repaired
II. Plural nouns for "lord/master" (adonai) that refer to single individuals:
Plural noun
who
Genesis 24:9,10,51
Adonai
Abraham master of servant
Genesis 39:2,3,7, 8,16,19,20
Adonai
Potiphar is Joseph's master
Genesis 40:7
Adonai
captain of a guard is master
Genesis 42:30,33; 44:8
Adonai
Joseph, the master of Egypt
Mal 1:6 and throughout the Old Testament
Adonai
Yahweh, God. The second most common term applied to God is "Lord" and it is almost always plural.
"And if I am a master [plural adonai], where is My respect? says the Lord of hosts" Mal 1:6
III. Five "Royal We" Biblical Proof Texts refuted:
The "plural of Majesty" (royal we) is never used in the Bible. Arians (Jehovah’s Witnesses, Anti-Trinitarians (Christadelphians), Unitarians and Modalists (UPCI United Pentecostal church international), will appeal to the following Bible texts as proof of "plural of Majesty". These texts clearly are not examples of "the royal we" being used in the Bible.
A. "the document which you sent to us has been translated and read before me." (Ezra 4:18)
The letter was addressed, not to the king alone, but many others as well, so this certainly is not an example of the "Royal We": "To King Artaxerxes: Your servants, the men in the region beyond the River, and now " Ezra 4:11
B. "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony." (John 3:11)
The "we" refers to Jesus and the Father, as seen in many other passages: "I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father." (John 8:38); "I know that His commandment is eternal life; therefore the things I speak, I speak just as the Father has told Me." (John 12:50); "If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true." (John 5:31)
Jesus' use of the plural WE (Jesus and Father) is also in response to Nicodemus' use of WE (John 3:2: Nicodemus and the other leaders). Jesus emphasizes the "us vs. them" challenge of authority between human and divine.
C. "just as he is Christ’s, so also are we. For even if I boast somewhat further about our authority, which the Lord gave for building you up and not for destroying you, I will not be put to shame" 2 Corinthians 10:7-8
The use of WE and OUR refer to Paul and Timothy, who sent the letter (2 Cor 1:1).
It may also refer to Paul and the other apostles, since the whole context is Paul defending his apostleship.
To suggest that Paul uses the "Royal We" here, is as wrong as it is unwarranted.
D. "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!" Galatians 1:8
The use of WE refers to the collectivity of the apostles and all those who taught the brethren in the Galatian region. This would include, Timothy, Titus, Barnabas and Silas.
No "Royal We" here.
E. "But he forsook the counsel of the elders which they had given him, and consulted with the young men who grew up with him and served him. So he said to them, "What counsel do you give that we may answer this people, who have spoken to me, saying, ‘Lighten the yoke which your father put on us’?" (2 Chronicles 10:8-9 and 1 Kings 12:9)
The obvious and natural meaning of "we may answer this people" is the King and his buddies, who collectively would formulate an answer together.
No reason this is the "Royal We" here.
Conclusion:
A. Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Unitarians argue that Elohim (Gods) and Adonai (Lords) are and example of "plural of unity" or "plural of majesty/intensity".
"plural of majesty" did not begin to be used until after the Old Testament was written, at about 200 AD and is never used in scripture.
It is wrong to take modern day poetic devices and read them back into a period of history when they did not exist.
It is wrong for Jehovah’s witnesses to read, "blood transfusions" back into the Bible’s prohibition against eating blood, when such a medical practice did not exist. (Of course just as drunkenness is condemned, except when you are getting your leg amputated for medical reasons, so too are blood transfusions exempt from all prohibitions on blood, on the basis of medical necessity.)
B. The evidence that "Let US make man in OUR image". (Gen 1:26) refers to the Trinity is irrefutable.
The Unitarians and Christadelphians are wrong because they say Us refers to God and the Angels. But man is not created in the image of angels, but of God. Jesus is not included in their view of US.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses are right to include Jesus and the Father in the US of Gen 1:26, but make Jesus the created arch-angel Michael. But Heb 1:5 proves Jesus cannot be, nor ever has been an angel. Further, in their self contradictory doctrine, they have Jesus the creature, as our co-creator (Jn 1:3; Col 1:16). But this violates Rom 1:25: "worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator". This passage teaches that if Jesus is the creator, as the Bible says he is, then he cannot be a creature. Jesus cannot be creator and creature at the same time!
C. Plural of Majesty is not the correct explanation as to why plural, nouns, verbs and adjectives are applied to God, because we find similar examples in the Hebrew language of the Old Testament that apply plurality to common creatures and things.
D. Such occasional usage's of plural, nouns, verbs and adjectives of God, man and material objects, are best explained as typical and normal for the Hebrew language. Its just they way they expressed things at times.
E. The plural nouns and pro-nouns applied to God, like WE, US, OUR, Elohim, Adonai are powerful evidence of the Trinity hidden in the Old Testament, to be discovered after the coming of Christ. The almost exclusive use of the plural elohim for God and adonai for Lord, make a strong case that any honest seeker could see. This extensive pattern is hard to argue away as plural of majesty.
F. To those who think there is even a single example of the "Royal We" in scripture we say: "We are not amused!"
God is one in unity, but three persons:
"Let US make man in OUR image". (Gen 1:26)
To those who think there is even a single example of the "Royal We" in scripture we say:
"We are not amused!"
Introduction:
A. What is the issue?
Anti-Trinitarians and Unitarians alike, try to explain away the plural references to God in the Old Testament: "Let US make man in OUR image". (Gen 1:26)
While Trinitarians expect to find such plural pronouns and verbs used in reference to God at face value, anti-Trinitarians fall all over themselves trying to find a way to avoid the obvious truth that there are three persons in the one God.
As we will see, all of the Anti-Trinitarian arguments are invalid leaving us with no other conclusion then the fact that God is a plurality of persons, just as the Biblical trinity teaches.
It is clear that these plural references to God in the Old Testament we hidden until fully revealed by Christ and his apostles with the proclamation of the deity of Jesus. Jews could look back and see Jesus there in Genesis!
B. Understanding the various terms used in this discussion:
Plural of Majesty comes from the Latin, "pluralis majestaticus" and is also known as "singular of intensity".
"Royal we" "we are not amused" (Queen Victoria)
C. History of the "Plural of Majesty" argument:
"We are not amused"
Queen Elizabeth 1st would not be amused...
about they way Anti-Trinitarians twist every plural reference to God as a mere "Royal We". After all, Elizabeth was a Trinitarian, and would not be one bit amused that her own words were being used to trash the very trinity she believed in! "Let US make man in OUR image" (Gen 1:26) cannot be "Plural of Majesty" because this poetic device did not even exist in scripture until after the Old Testament was completed. The apostolic fathers had never heard of "plural of majesty", much less believe it. They unanimously interpreted Gen 1:26 as the Father speaking to the Son.
There are no examples in the either the Old or New Testament of Plural of Majesty. At the end of this document, we refute 5 texts that anti-Trinitarian say contain Plural of Majesty.
The earliest we find this poetic device being used in about the 4th century during the Byzantine era.
Other cultures that lived during the time of Moses never used the plural "Elohim", the way the Bible does, but instead used the simple singular "el". This nicely silences two different sets of heretics: First, it silences the Bible trashing liberals, who falsely claim the plural "elohim" is a carry over from a previous polytheistic origin of Judaism. Second, it silences the anti-Trinitarians, who falsely claim "plural of majesty" was widespread in all cultures in history.
The "Royal We" was made most famous by Queen Victoria when a vulgar joke was told in her presence. When she replied, "we are not amused", she clearly intended to speak on behalf of the other ladies whom she knew were equally offended.
D. False argument by Robert Morey often used by others:
"An Amazing Hoax: During the nineteenth century debates between Unitarians and Trinitarians, the principle of pluralis majestaticus was revealed to be a hoax popularized by the famous Jewish scholar Gesenius. It became clear that he used it as a ruse de guerre against Christianity." (Robert Morey, The Trinity, p95)
William Gesenius wrote his lexicon in 1846 AD: The Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon (1846 AD) is a translation of the "Lexicon Manuale Hebraicum et Chaldaicum in Veteris Testamenti Libros," of Dr. William Gesenius, a Jewish scholar.
William Gesenius couldn’t be guilty of such a hoax, motivated by "a strategy of war", when the plural of majesty dates back to the 4th century! Even Calvin discussed the plural of majesty.
Morey, although a Trinitarian, is correct in his view that Plural of Majesty is never used in the Bible, but this argument is invalid and needs to be withdrawn. He shoots himself in the foot by creating a false argument to teach something that is otherwise true. We need to be careful.
E. What scholars say about "Plural of Majesty":
"Every one who is acquainted with the rudiments of the Hebrew and Chaldee languages, must know that God, in the holy Writings, very often spoke of Himself in the plural. The passages are numerous, in which, instead of a grammatical agreement between the subject and predicate, we meet with a construction, which some modern grammarians, who possess more of the so-called philosophical than of the real knowledge of the Oriental languages, call a pluralis excellentiae. This helps them out of every apparent difficulty. Such a pluralis excellentiae was, however, a thing unknown to Moses and the prophets. Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, David, and all the other kings, throughout TeNaKh (the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa) speak in the singular, and not as modern kings in the plural. They do not say we, but I, command; as in Gen. xli. 41; Dan. iii. 29; Ezra i. 2, etc." (Rabbi Tzvi Nassi, Oxford University professor, The Great Mystery, 1970, p6, )
"This first person plural can hardly be a mere editorial or royal plural that refers to the speaker alone, for no such usage is demonstrable anywhere else in biblical Hebrew. Therefore, we must face the question of who are included in this "us" and "our." It could hardly include the angels in consultation with God, for nowhere is it ever stated that man was created in the image of angels, only of God. Verse 27 then affirms: "and God [Elohim] created man in His own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female He created them" (NASB). God--the same God who spoke of Himself in the plural--now states that He created man in His image. In other words, the plural equals the singular. This can only be understood in terms of the Trinitarian nature of God. The one true God subsists in three Persons, Persons who are able to confer with one another and carry their plans into action together--without ceasing to be one God." (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Gleason Archer, p.359, commenting on whether Gen 1:26 is a "plural of majesty")
"The best answer that they [Old Hebrew lexicographers and grammarians] could give was that the plural form used for the name (or title) of God was the ‘pluralis majestatis,’ that is the plural of majesty…to say nothing of the fact that it is not at all certain that the ‘pluralis majestatis’ is ever found in the Old Testament, there is an explanation much nearer at hand and much simpler, and that is, that a plural name was used for the one God, in spite of the intense monotheism of the Jews, because there is a plurality of person in the one Godhead." (The God of the Bible, R. A.Torrey, 1923, p 64)
"Another very popular view in modem times is that God uses the plural, just as kings do, as a mark of dignity (the so-called "plural of majesty"), but it is only late in Jewish history that such a form of speech occurs, and then it is used by Persian and Greek rulers (Esdr. iv. 18; 1 Mace. x. 19). Nor can the plural be regarded as merely indicating the way in which God summons Himself to energy, for the use of the language is against this (Gen. ii. 18; Is. xxxiii. 10)." (Trinity, A Catholic Dictionary, William E. Addis & Thomas Arnold, 1960, p 822-830)
E. What the apostolic Fathers say about Gen 1:26:
"The plural "We" was regarded by the fathers and earlier theologians almost unanimously as indicative of the Trinity" (Keil & Delitzsch, Genesis 1:26, Vol. 1, Page 38) Note: after observing that that the unanimous view of the apostolic Fathers was that "we" referred to the three persons of the trinity, he then rejects this and adopts the plural of majesty view. This is most unfortunate. If only he had known plural of majesty did not exist historically among the Jews until after the Old Testament was written in about 200 AD.)
180 AD Irenaeus "It was not angels, therefore, who made us, nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor any one else, except the Word of the Lord, nor any Power remotely distant from the Father of all things. For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishing of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, "Let Us make man after Our image and likeness; " [Gen. 1:26]" (Against Heresies 4:20:1).
I. Plural nouns and pronouns with singular verbs:
The easiest way to dismiss the argument that the plural pronouns applied to God can be explained as "Plural of Majesty" is to observe that the Hebrew has many examples of plural pronouns also being applied to single human individuals.
Plural of Majesty fails because we find plural references to both God and individual men.
If the Holy Spirit intended to use these plural references of God as "singular of intensity", then why does He intensify both creator and creation alike?
Obviously the, "Plural of Majesty" does not explain these plural references.
text
Plural noun
Singular verbs
Gen 1:1
Elohim (God)
created
Genesis 46:7
Sons, grandsons, daughters, granddaughters, descendants
brought
Judges 12:7
cities
Buried
Nehemiah 3:8
goldsmiths
Repaired
II. Plural nouns for "lord/master" (adonai) that refer to single individuals:
Plural noun
who
Genesis 24:9,10,51
Adonai
Abraham master of servant
Genesis 39:2,3,7, 8,16,19,20
Adonai
Potiphar is Joseph's master
Genesis 40:7
Adonai
captain of a guard is master
Genesis 42:30,33; 44:8
Adonai
Joseph, the master of Egypt
Mal 1:6 and throughout the Old Testament
Adonai
Yahweh, God. The second most common term applied to God is "Lord" and it is almost always plural.
"And if I am a master [plural adonai], where is My respect? says the Lord of hosts" Mal 1:6
III. Five "Royal We" Biblical Proof Texts refuted:
The "plural of Majesty" (royal we) is never used in the Bible. Arians (Jehovah’s Witnesses, Anti-Trinitarians (Christadelphians), Unitarians and Modalists (UPCI United Pentecostal church international), will appeal to the following Bible texts as proof of "plural of Majesty". These texts clearly are not examples of "the royal we" being used in the Bible.
A. "the document which you sent to us has been translated and read before me." (Ezra 4:18)
The letter was addressed, not to the king alone, but many others as well, so this certainly is not an example of the "Royal We": "To King Artaxerxes: Your servants, the men in the region beyond the River, and now " Ezra 4:11
B. "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony." (John 3:11)
The "we" refers to Jesus and the Father, as seen in many other passages: "I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father." (John 8:38); "I know that His commandment is eternal life; therefore the things I speak, I speak just as the Father has told Me." (John 12:50); "If I alone testify about Myself, My testimony is not true." (John 5:31)
Jesus' use of the plural WE (Jesus and Father) is also in response to Nicodemus' use of WE (John 3:2: Nicodemus and the other leaders). Jesus emphasizes the "us vs. them" challenge of authority between human and divine.
C. "just as he is Christ’s, so also are we. For even if I boast somewhat further about our authority, which the Lord gave for building you up and not for destroying you, I will not be put to shame" 2 Corinthians 10:7-8
The use of WE and OUR refer to Paul and Timothy, who sent the letter (2 Cor 1:1).
It may also refer to Paul and the other apostles, since the whole context is Paul defending his apostleship.
To suggest that Paul uses the "Royal We" here, is as wrong as it is unwarranted.
D. "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!" Galatians 1:8
The use of WE refers to the collectivity of the apostles and all those who taught the brethren in the Galatian region. This would include, Timothy, Titus, Barnabas and Silas.
No "Royal We" here.
E. "But he forsook the counsel of the elders which they had given him, and consulted with the young men who grew up with him and served him. So he said to them, "What counsel do you give that we may answer this people, who have spoken to me, saying, ‘Lighten the yoke which your father put on us’?" (2 Chronicles 10:8-9 and 1 Kings 12:9)
The obvious and natural meaning of "we may answer this people" is the King and his buddies, who collectively would formulate an answer together.
No reason this is the "Royal We" here.
Conclusion:
A. Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Unitarians argue that Elohim (Gods) and Adonai (Lords) are and example of "plural of unity" or "plural of majesty/intensity".
"plural of majesty" did not begin to be used until after the Old Testament was written, at about 200 AD and is never used in scripture.
It is wrong to take modern day poetic devices and read them back into a period of history when they did not exist.
It is wrong for Jehovah’s witnesses to read, "blood transfusions" back into the Bible’s prohibition against eating blood, when such a medical practice did not exist. (Of course just as drunkenness is condemned, except when you are getting your leg amputated for medical reasons, so too are blood transfusions exempt from all prohibitions on blood, on the basis of medical necessity.)
B. The evidence that "Let US make man in OUR image". (Gen 1:26) refers to the Trinity is irrefutable.
The Unitarians and Christadelphians are wrong because they say Us refers to God and the Angels. But man is not created in the image of angels, but of God. Jesus is not included in their view of US.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses are right to include Jesus and the Father in the US of Gen 1:26, but make Jesus the created arch-angel Michael. But Heb 1:5 proves Jesus cannot be, nor ever has been an angel. Further, in their self contradictory doctrine, they have Jesus the creature, as our co-creator (Jn 1:3; Col 1:16). But this violates Rom 1:25: "worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator". This passage teaches that if Jesus is the creator, as the Bible says he is, then he cannot be a creature. Jesus cannot be creator and creature at the same time!
C. Plural of Majesty is not the correct explanation as to why plural, nouns, verbs and adjectives are applied to God, because we find similar examples in the Hebrew language of the Old Testament that apply plurality to common creatures and things.
D. Such occasional usage's of plural, nouns, verbs and adjectives of God, man and material objects, are best explained as typical and normal for the Hebrew language. Its just they way they expressed things at times.
E. The plural nouns and pro-nouns applied to God, like WE, US, OUR, Elohim, Adonai are powerful evidence of the Trinity hidden in the Old Testament, to be discovered after the coming of Christ. The almost exclusive use of the plural elohim for God and adonai for Lord, make a strong case that any honest seeker could see. This extensive pattern is hard to argue away as plural of majesty.
F. To those who think there is even a single example of the "Royal We" in scripture we say: "We are not amused!"
Last edited:
abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
lol who has wrote this, this is not of old, this is a comment from someone trying to bash the true claim of royal we,
therefore it is invalid, becuase it his in his interest to prove this flasly, i can do the same , but i choose truth over falsehood
therefore it is invalid, becuase it his in his interest to prove this flasly, i can do the same , but i choose truth over falsehood
sevenxtrust
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 0
- Religion
- Christianity
No, you have just choosen the way of Cain and ran at Abel. O Great Harlot, how will you see, that mine and your scriptures are interpretted differently. God said himself in 2 Peter 1:20 to interpret scripture with scripture and not to lean on our fleshly understanding. Gods word will always make a mockery of mans logic!! Beware of your choice,,,there is only One True God and One True Bible.. But I see that you are not open to the True God..ask Him my fellow man. Mean what you ask and He Will guide YOU to the Truth..
abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
? umm i beleive in GOD my friend, and by the way there is no 1 true bible anymore, its not found, and what is left is tempered with by man, so how can you beleive this?? word of someother man ?? just a regular fellow tampering with GODS word??
inthe Quran which never changed since 1400 years , it is the same everywhere you go, becuase this time GOD says he will protect it, it says
"Behold!' the Angel said, God has chosen you, and purified you, and chosen you above the women of all nations. Mary, God gives you good news of a word from Him, whose name shall be the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, honored in this world and in the Hereafter, and one of those brought near to God. He shall speak to the people from his cradle and in maturity, and he shall be of the righteous. She said: "My Lord! How shall I have a son when no man has touched me?'
He said: "Even so; God creates what He will. When He decrees a thing,
He says to it, 'Be!' and it is." [3:42-47]
inthe Quran which never changed since 1400 years , it is the same everywhere you go, becuase this time GOD says he will protect it, it says
"Behold!' the Angel said, God has chosen you, and purified you, and chosen you above the women of all nations. Mary, God gives you good news of a word from Him, whose name shall be the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, honored in this world and in the Hereafter, and one of those brought near to God. He shall speak to the people from his cradle and in maturity, and he shall be of the righteous. She said: "My Lord! How shall I have a son when no man has touched me?'
He said: "Even so; God creates what He will. When He decrees a thing,
He says to it, 'Be!' and it is." [3:42-47]
أحمد
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,895
- Reaction score
- 330
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
:? I'm just wondering why you chose to use singular instead of plural after your long essay on trinity?
It just complicates things even further for you (not me) to call upon not only a unity of three, but as a single entity. As for the Hebrew; we'll discuss that in loads more detail in the near future Insha-Allah.
Jesus said he was/is the I AM.
The man that was Jesus was 100% man and was/is 100% God.
God is one, not three.
I am sure this will raise some questions from some, I will start addressing any questions tommorow at an earlier hour if everyday life doesn't get in the way.
Thanks
Nimrod
The man that was Jesus was 100% man and was/is 100% God.
God is one, not three.
I am sure this will raise some questions from some, I will start addressing any questions tommorow at an earlier hour if everyday life doesn't get in the way.
Thanks
Nimrod
sevenxtrust
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 0
- Religion
- Christianity
Genesis 19:24
"Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven. Genesis 19:24.
Introduction:
A. Genesis chapters 18-19 is a powerful proof text for Trinitarians for these reasons:
First, is clearly shows Yahweh walking around on the earth in human form with two angels. They are called "three men". If Jehovah's Witnesses argue that they are called men, the fact remains that just as angels are not men, neither is God a man. Yahweh and the two angels are called men, because they appeared as men.
Second: God taking human appearance on earth is called a "Theophanies". There are several other examples of Theophanies in scripture.
Third, you have Genesis 19:24 that has two distinct Yahweh's: One on earth and one in heaven. "Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven. Genesis 19:24. Although the unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that this was Jesus talking to Abraham, such is a guess and not specifically known by scripture.
The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that this was Jesus talking to Abraham, in Genesis 18. In this story, Abraham meets God (Jesus) and the two angels.
Jesus came right out and said He was the one who talked to Abraham. This is what Jesus meant when He said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." (John 8:56) God appearing to Abraham is an example of a Theophanies. Elijah is also said to have seen Jesus in heaven in Isa 6 + John 12:41. Jesus appearing to Elijah is not be an example of a "Theophanies" because Jesus was seen in heaven.
For Unitarians, Gen 19:24 + Amos 4:11 is a like getting struck by lightening twice in the same place! Amazingly, Amos 4:10-11 has two Yahweh's just like Gen 19:24 when talking about the exact same event!: "Yet you have not returned to Me, [Father]" declares Yahweh [Father]. "I [Father] overthrew you, as God [Son] overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, And you were like a firebrand snatched from a blaze; Yet you have not returned to Me [Father]" declares Yahweh [Father]." (Amos 4:10-11)
B. These points are absolutely devastating to Jehovah's Witnesses, Unitarians and Christadelphians. They have no answers.
I. The context irrefutably proves that Yahweh was walking around on the earth, in human form, with two angels:
A. We begin with an expository examination of the texts with commentary to prove that Yahweh was walking on the earth in person in human form.
Commentary
Text
three men: Yahweh + 2 angels appear to Abraham
"Now the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day. When Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth" Genesis 18:1-2
It was God who was standing before Abraham in human form.
"And Yahweh said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?’ " Genesis 18:13
Three men intend on visiting Sodom.
"Then the [three] men rose up from there, and looked down toward Sodom; and Abraham was walking with them to send them off. Yahweh said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, " Genesis 18:16-17
God, in human form says this directly to Abraham
"Yahweh said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do" Genesis 18:17
God, in human form says this directly to Abraham. This verse shows that Yahweh would go personally to Sodom and see for Himself.
"And Yahweh said, "The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave. I [Yahweh] will go down now, and see if they have done entirely according to its outcry, which has come to Me; and if not, I will know." Genesis 18:20
The two angels, called men, depart, leaving Yahweh behind to talk to Abraham.
"Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, while Abraham was still standing before Yahweh. " Genesis 18:22
Abraham replies to the man and calls him Lord. Notice the Lord (the man) intended on destroying it.
"Then he said, "Oh may the Lord [adonai] not be angry, and I shall speak only this once; suppose ten are found there?" And He said, "I will not destroy it on account of the ten." " Genesis 18:32
Yahweh, in human form, left Abraham and went to Sodom to join the two angels who left earlier.
"As soon as He had finished speaking to Abraham, Yahweh departed, and Abraham returned to his place." Genesis 18:33
Two angels visit Lot. During this time, these two are never called Yahweh, neither are they addressed by Lot as Yahweh.
"Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening as Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. " Genesis 19:1
Lot addresses these two angels, as Adonai, not Yahweh.
And he said, "Now behold, my lords, please turn aside into your servant’s house"" Genesis 19:2
Notice the angels say that Yahweh sent them. Yahweh is not present with Lot the way he was with Abraham. The change is powerful proof of our major premise.
"for we are about to destroy this place, because their outcry has become so great before Yahweh that Yahweh has sent us to destroy it." " Genesis 19:13
Yahweh, the man who was talking to Abraham, was to destroy Sodom.
"Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, and said, "Up, get out of this place, for Yahweh will destroy the city."" Genesis 19:14
Again the two are called angels, never Yahweh.
"When morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, "Up, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away in the punishment of the city." " Genesis 19:15
There are two Yahweh's present in this verse and the context. The man talking to Abraham, called Yahweh, was standing on the earth and commanded the city destroyed. Yahweh in heaven then sent the fire out of heaven.
"Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven." Genesis 19:24
"Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven. Genesis 19:24.
Introduction:
A. Genesis chapters 18-19 is a powerful proof text for Trinitarians for these reasons:
First, is clearly shows Yahweh walking around on the earth in human form with two angels. They are called "three men". If Jehovah's Witnesses argue that they are called men, the fact remains that just as angels are not men, neither is God a man. Yahweh and the two angels are called men, because they appeared as men.
Second: God taking human appearance on earth is called a "Theophanies". There are several other examples of Theophanies in scripture.
Third, you have Genesis 19:24 that has two distinct Yahweh's: One on earth and one in heaven. "Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven. Genesis 19:24. Although the unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that this was Jesus talking to Abraham, such is a guess and not specifically known by scripture.
The unanimous opinion of the apostolic Fathers was that this was Jesus talking to Abraham, in Genesis 18. In this story, Abraham meets God (Jesus) and the two angels.
Jesus came right out and said He was the one who talked to Abraham. This is what Jesus meant when He said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." (John 8:56) God appearing to Abraham is an example of a Theophanies. Elijah is also said to have seen Jesus in heaven in Isa 6 + John 12:41. Jesus appearing to Elijah is not be an example of a "Theophanies" because Jesus was seen in heaven.
For Unitarians, Gen 19:24 + Amos 4:11 is a like getting struck by lightening twice in the same place! Amazingly, Amos 4:10-11 has two Yahweh's just like Gen 19:24 when talking about the exact same event!: "Yet you have not returned to Me, [Father]" declares Yahweh [Father]. "I [Father] overthrew you, as God [Son] overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, And you were like a firebrand snatched from a blaze; Yet you have not returned to Me [Father]" declares Yahweh [Father]." (Amos 4:10-11)
B. These points are absolutely devastating to Jehovah's Witnesses, Unitarians and Christadelphians. They have no answers.
I. The context irrefutably proves that Yahweh was walking around on the earth, in human form, with two angels:
A. We begin with an expository examination of the texts with commentary to prove that Yahweh was walking on the earth in person in human form.
Commentary
Text
three men: Yahweh + 2 angels appear to Abraham
"Now the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day. When Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth" Genesis 18:1-2
It was God who was standing before Abraham in human form.
"And Yahweh said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?’ " Genesis 18:13
Three men intend on visiting Sodom.
"Then the [three] men rose up from there, and looked down toward Sodom; and Abraham was walking with them to send them off. Yahweh said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, " Genesis 18:16-17
God, in human form says this directly to Abraham
"Yahweh said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do" Genesis 18:17
God, in human form says this directly to Abraham. This verse shows that Yahweh would go personally to Sodom and see for Himself.
"And Yahweh said, "The outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah is indeed great, and their sin is exceedingly grave. I [Yahweh] will go down now, and see if they have done entirely according to its outcry, which has come to Me; and if not, I will know." Genesis 18:20
The two angels, called men, depart, leaving Yahweh behind to talk to Abraham.
"Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, while Abraham was still standing before Yahweh. " Genesis 18:22
Abraham replies to the man and calls him Lord. Notice the Lord (the man) intended on destroying it.
"Then he said, "Oh may the Lord [adonai] not be angry, and I shall speak only this once; suppose ten are found there?" And He said, "I will not destroy it on account of the ten." " Genesis 18:32
Yahweh, in human form, left Abraham and went to Sodom to join the two angels who left earlier.
"As soon as He had finished speaking to Abraham, Yahweh departed, and Abraham returned to his place." Genesis 18:33
Two angels visit Lot. During this time, these two are never called Yahweh, neither are they addressed by Lot as Yahweh.
"Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening as Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. " Genesis 19:1
Lot addresses these two angels, as Adonai, not Yahweh.
And he said, "Now behold, my lords, please turn aside into your servant’s house"" Genesis 19:2
Notice the angels say that Yahweh sent them. Yahweh is not present with Lot the way he was with Abraham. The change is powerful proof of our major premise.
"for we are about to destroy this place, because their outcry has become so great before Yahweh that Yahweh has sent us to destroy it." " Genesis 19:13
Yahweh, the man who was talking to Abraham, was to destroy Sodom.
"Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, and said, "Up, get out of this place, for Yahweh will destroy the city."" Genesis 19:14
Again the two are called angels, never Yahweh.
"When morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, "Up, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away in the punishment of the city." " Genesis 19:15
There are two Yahweh's present in this verse and the context. The man talking to Abraham, called Yahweh, was standing on the earth and commanded the city destroyed. Yahweh in heaven then sent the fire out of heaven.
"Then Yahweh [on earth in human form] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh [in spirit form in heaven] out of heaven." Genesis 19:24
The Architect
Rising Member
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 2
All I really have to say is that sevenxtrust has pretty much taken the words right out of my mouth. I would have said generally the same thing and provided the same information.
But I must state that you all are very close minded. Listen people, can either of our sides really prove that our respective faith is correct? No. Only in the end when God judges us all will we truly know.
Peace to you all.
But I must state that you all are very close minded. Listen people, can either of our sides really prove that our respective faith is correct? No. Only in the end when God judges us all will we truly know.
Peace to you all.
abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
no your close minded, we can prove our prespective, and you can nooottt
If the bible is not the original what can you possibly tell me?? nothing, you have no prove my friend??
If the bible is not the original what can you possibly tell me?? nothing, you have no prove my friend??
sevenxtrust
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 0
- Religion
- Christianity
O.K, who wrote the Quran?
AUTHORSHIP: It is difficult to even know who the author of the Quran truly is. Was it Allah (Suras 53:2-18; 81:19-24), or the holy spirit (Suras 16:102; 26:192-194), or Angels (Sura 15:8), or just the Angel Gabriel (Sura 2:97)?
abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
Nobody Wrote It !!
It Was Memorized From The Prophet(pbh), Through Gabriel(as)
They Started Writing It After Their Was A Shortage In People Who Had Memorized It, So They Could Preserve It
It Was Memorized From The Prophet(pbh), Through Gabriel(as)
They Started Writing It After Their Was A Shortage In People Who Had Memorized It, So They Could Preserve It
The Architect
Rising Member
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 2
That is a clear example of close mindedness right there. Prove that you are right, and I might convert to Islam. But there it is again, you cannot. And neither can I. I believe what I believe as a Christian, and you believe what you believe as a Muslim. I respect your religion, and I expect the very same respect of mine from you. =/
abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
Oh Please Dont Get It Confused.....i Respect You As A Person And Your Religion 100% Trust Me....
But When It Comes Down To It, Their Is Noo Origanal Bible!! Its Lost, So You Or Anybody Elses Claims Are Basicly Bogus, Becuase Its Mans Claim
But When It Comes Down To It, Their Is Noo Origanal Bible!! Its Lost, So You Or Anybody Elses Claims Are Basicly Bogus, Becuase Its Mans Claim
The Architect
Rising Member
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 2
The Bible is God's Word. It has not been lost through the ages; it has just been translated differently for better understanding. There may be many different translations, but they all contain the same message.
abdul Majid
IB Veteran
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 48
NOT BEEN LOST??? WHAT DO YOU MEAN !!
THERE IS NO ORIGINAL
There are also different versions of the Gospel or what is commonly called The New Testament in the Koine Greek language and Latin and these also have many translations to even other langugaes.
Even amongst the English translations there are great differences. To mention two very clear differences for example; the Catholic Bible [c. 325 A.D] contains 73 books in total, while the Protestant Bible contains only 66 books, and although the newer (Protestant version) was taken from the Catholic Bible even then these books do not match completely with each other.
There is no common denominator for any of the many different versions of the Bible.