|
Author
|
Topic: Is Jesus God?
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
EMA writes: It would seem to make more sense therefore, that the expression "firstborn of all creation" would have to do with his birth as a man Im sure Jesus was not the first man to have been born.
EMA writes: Simply put, he cannot be the creator of ALL THINGS, as the scriptures clearly indicate and be a creature before his incarnation It certainly can if you dont ignore the verses surrounding his own creation including Proverbs 8. We are told that Jesus was the first creation of God and that Jesus became a 'master worker' beside his father. So all things that came after Jesus creation could certainly have come into existence by Jesus hand with the help of his father.
EMA writes: the Apostle John was not speaking at all, Jesus was and he clearly describes himslef and the A&O, beginning and end. Revelations 2:8 Revelation chapter 2 does not say Jesus is the A&O. Its not in the passage.
EMA writes: Now what arrogance of any Angel, or created being to declare himself as such. But if he is indeed God, it makes perfect sense Jesus can be declared as the first and the last for a few reasons. He was the first creation of God and the last of Gods direct creations. Jesus was also called 'the last Adam' meaning the last perfect man on earth at 1Cor 15:45. So being called the 'first and last' does not have to mean that he is God. It could be a reference to these other aspects of Jesus being the first and last...aspects that the apostles would have understood.
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
|
Message 274 of 492 (553618)
04-04-2010 8:54 AM
|
Reply to: Message 272 by jaywill
04-04-2010 7:00 AM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
jaywill writes: I think you are sinning and are self condemned when you continually deny that Jesus is "our Savior God" This debate is not about whether Jesus is a savior or not. I most certainly do believe he is the savior. Its about if he is Jehovah or not. Unfortunately for the trinity doctrine, Jesus was SENT to be the savior, He explained his role in Gods purpose perfectly:
John 6:38-40 I have come down from heaven to do, not my will, but the will of him that sent me. This is the will of him that sent me, that I should lose nothing out of all that he has given me but that I should resurrect it at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone that beholds the Son and exercises faith in him should have everlasting life, and I will resurrect him at the last day. He also explained that after his mission was accomplished, he would submit himself to God and relinquish his position as the king of the kingdom....this is so mankind can have an intimate relationship with God in the same way Adam and Eve did
1Corinthians 15:24 Next, the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power, and, when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone. Jesus subjects himself to God, this proves beyond doubt that he is not equal, is not a part of, is not an incarnation of God...Rather he is a separate entity. Yes, he is the savior of mankind but NO he is not Jehovah. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 272 by jaywill, posted 04-04-2010 7:00 AM | | jaywill has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 304 by jaywill, posted 04-06-2010 7:23 AM | | Peg has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
cavediver writes: And I think it would be good to see the actual Greek at this point. Can you provide that? Tit 2:13Gr., τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ (tou me‧ga′lou The‧ou′ kai so‧te′ros he‧mon′ Khri‧stou′ I‧e‧sou′) the NWT renders this verse as "while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus" this is in harmony with the following translations: 1934 of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus The Riverside New Testament,Boston and New York. 1935 of the great God and of our Saviour Christ Jesus A New Translation of the Bible, by James Moffatt, New York and London. 1957 of the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ La Sainte Bible, by Louis Segond, Paris. 1970 of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus The New American Bible, New York and London. 1972 of the great God and of Christ Jesus our saviour The New Testament in Modern English, by J. B. Phillips, New York. The reason for this translation is that the verse has two nouns connected by καi (kai, and), the first noun being preceded by the definite article τοu (tou, of the) and the second noun without the definite article. Its the same at 2Pe 1:1, 2. A definate distinction is made between God and Jesus in that verse too. Therefore, in Tit 2:13, two distinct persons, Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, are mentioned....Jaywills translation does not make that distinction.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 273 by cavediver, posted 04-04-2010 7:21 AM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Granville Sharp
kbertsche writes: Nearly all of the modern translations equate "God" and "Savior". There is a good reason for this: Titus 2:13 satisfies one of the grammatical rules for use of the Greek article which were enumerated by Granville Sharp: Granville Sharp writes: When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho, or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle ... There are other scholars who do not believe this is the case. They say the opposite.
An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, by C. F. D. Moule, Cambridge, England, 1971, p.109 writes: the sense of the great God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ ... is possible in κοινή [koi‧ne′] Greek even without the repetition [of the definite article]. The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays, by Ezra Abbot, Boston, 1888, pp.439-457. On p.452 writes: In the case before us [Tit 2:13], the omission of the article before σωτῆρος [so‧te′ros] seems to me to present no difficulty,not because σωτῆρος is made sufficiently definite by the addition of ἡμῶν [he‧mon′] (Winer), for, since God as well as Christ is often called our Saviour, ἡ δόξα τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν [he do′xa tou me‧ga′lou The‧ou′ kai so‧te′ros he‧mon′], standing alone, would most naturally be understood of one subject, namely, God, the Father; but the addition of ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ to σωτῆρος ἡμῶν [I‧e‧sou′ Khri‧stou′ to so‧te′ros he‧mon′] changes the case entirely, restricting the σωτῆρος ἡμῶν to a person or being who, according to Paul’s habitual use of language, is distinguished from the person or being whom he designates as ὁ θεός [ho The‧os′], so that there was no need of the repetition of the article to prevent ambiguity The same construction is found in these verses...i would be interseted to see how the translations you quoted render these verses. Could you post them for us to compare?
Constructed with two nouns connected by καί as at Titus2:13 writes: 2thess1:12b "... in accord with the undeserved kindness of our God and of the Lord Jesus Christ" Acts 13:50 "But the Jews stirred up the reputable women who worshiped [God] and the principal men of the city..." Eph 5:5 "For YOU know this, recognizing it for yourselves, that no fornicator or unclean person or greedy personwhich means being an idolaterhas any inheritance in the kingdom of the Christ and of God" 1Timothy 5:21 "I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus..." 1Timothy 6:13 "In the sight of God, who preserves all things alive, and of Christ Jesus" 2Tim 4:1 "I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is destined to judge" kbertsche writes: As others have clarified, the rule really only applies to nouns in the singular (as in Titus 2:13). The Granville Sharp rule claims that "God" and "Savior" refer to the same person in Titus 2:13. Well im sure you can see from the above scriptures that have the same construction as Titus 2:13 that it would be very difficult to render some of these with in the singular. If that were the case then Acts 13:50 would be telling us that the priniple men of the city are God.
kbertshe writes: (As with many topics, Wikipedia tries to make this one controversial. But leading Greek scholars (e.g. Dan Wallace) seem to agree that the rule is valid, and nearly all modern translators have applied it to Titus 2:13.) I understand that may be the case, but I think it should be questioned in light of other verses of similar construction Im sure you realise that some translators will render verses that more closely resemble their own theologies....so its not always safe to assume they are correct. You can see how all those translations i posted in msg 275 that not all scholars (including some modern) agree with the singular rendering. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 280 by kbertsche, posted 04-04-2010 6:44 PM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
|
|
Message 283 of 492 (553719)
04-04-2010 7:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 282 by jaywill
04-04-2010 7:37 PM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
jaywill writes: Jehovah God says "I, even I, am Jehovah, And there is no Savior besides Me." (Isaiah 43:11b) He also says that there is no God was formed either before Him or after Him: "Before Me was no God formed, Neither will there be any after Me" (Isaiah 43:10) The polytheism of Russell and Arius was rightly rejected by the Christian church. the above scriptures say Jehovah is the savior, yet we know Jesus is the savior also. This is not an issue to who the savior is because if Jehovah never sent Jesus to earth, then there would be no savior at all. In fact, Jesus is the means by which Jehovah will save mankind. They are both saviors but jesus only a savior because he was chosen to be such by Jehovah....the one who is responsible for all salvation. And regarding polytheism...have you looked at a church lately??? how many saints do the parishners pray to? Why is Mary venerated and worshiped...why do people pray to Jesus rather then Jehovah??? Why are the followers bowing down to idols and kissing rings on fingers and stroking the crosses around their necks??? its because the church's promote polytheism.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 282 by jaywill, posted 04-04-2010 7:37 PM | | jaywill has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Granville Sharp
im not buying it. the rule is that if two nouns are connected by καi (and) and the first is preceded by the definite article, then it is a reference to two distinct subjects. this is why the translations i posted in msg 275 render the verse at titus as of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus Here are the verses i asked for from the translations you use where the same construction is found as in Titus:
2Thess 1:12 NET "that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to 18 the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ." NASB "that the name of our Lord Jesus will be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ." NIV: "that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ" ESV: "that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ." ______________________________________________________ Acts 13:50 NIV "But the Jews incited the God-fearing women of high standing and the leading men of the city" ESV "But the Jews incited the devout women of high standing and the leading men of the city" KJV "But the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women, and the chief men of the city _______________________________________________________ Eph 5:5 KJV "in the kingdom of Christ and of God. NLT "the Kingdom of Christ and of God." NRSV " in the kingdom of Christ and of God." NASB "in the kingdom of Christ and God" _______________________________________ 1Timothy 5:21 Weymouth: "I solemnly call upon you, in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus" NRSV: "In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus" NLT: "I solemnly command you in the presence of God and Christ Jesus" NASV: "I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus" KJV: "I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ" ___________________________________________________ 1Timothy 6:13 NASB "I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus" KJV "I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus" HCSB "In the presence of God, who gives life to all, and before Christ Jesus" NLT "And I charge you before God, who gives life to all, and before Christ Jesus" ________________________________________ 2 Timothy 4:1 NASB "I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ" KJV "I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ" AB "I CHARGE [you] in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus" ESV "I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus
Im sure you can see that in many of these verses the translators have not abided by the rule of Granville sharp. This is because when two nouns are connected by kai (and) and the first noun is preceded by the definite article (tou, of the) then there are two subjects being spoken of...not one. In many of the above scriptures we even see the use of "OF" so tell me why they are not applying the Granville sharp rule here. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 284 by kbertsche, posted 04-04-2010 8:08 PM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
|
|
Message 288 of 492 (553785)
04-05-2010 2:17 AM
|
Reply to: Message 287 by kbertsche
04-04-2010 11:45 PM
|
|
Re: Granville Sharp
kbertsche writes: The GS rule says that "Christ" and "God" refer to the same person here. NET, NASB, ESV, and NKJV all respect the GS rule in their translations. But the others do not for some reason. if they are trying to convey the idea that they are relating to one person, why would they use the term 'of Christ AND OF God' In english, i would read that as refering to two individuals, not one. This is exactly why the list of translations i posted in msg 275 show that the verse is rendered as two indivduals by many translators
1934 of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus The Riverside New Testament,Boston and New York. 1935 of the great God and of our Saviour Christ Jesus A New Translation of the Bible, by James Moffatt, New York and London. 1957 of the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ La Sainte Bible, by Louis Segond, Paris. 1970 of the great God and of our Savior Christ Jesus The New American Bible, New York and London. 1972 of the great God and of Christ Jesus our saviour The New Testament in Modern English, by J. B. Phillips, New York. kbertsche writes: The GS rule says that "Christ" and "God" refer to the same person here. NET, NASB, ESV, and NKJV all respect the GS rule in their translations. But the others do not for some reason. i would say the others do not respect the GS rule because they do not believe it is accurate.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 287 by kbertsche, posted 04-04-2010 11:45 PM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: The Lord is the Spirit
John 10:10 writes: When man chooses to believe in "another Jesus" other than the ONE revealed in Scripture, there is no salvation in any other NAME (Acts 4:12). Not even in Jehovah....the God whom Jesus preached?
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: The Lord is the Spirit
John 10:10 writes: Your argument lies not with me, but with the revealed Word of God. The writer of Hebrews declares this in Heb 1, 1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. i completely agree, i have no argument with the scriptures at all. I accept them 100% As Hebrews 1 says, God spoke thru the prophets long ago and then he sent his son to speak on his behalf. Exactly. Now if you think that the Son is God because of what hebrews says, then you must also think that the prophets were God too, yes?
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
EMA writes: Your kidding right Peg. Alpha and Omega mean beginning and end, the first and the last. There is no other significance to the these words usages in another language, that they do not convey in English. you are only assuming that the first and the last in Rev chpt 2 means the alpha and omega. As i showed, Jesus was actually called the first and last for other reasons. So why do you assume that the apostle John is not making reference to these? I find no reason in the text to assume John meant alpha and omega and if he did, why didnt he simply write it as alpha and omega???
EMA writes: Secondly, Isa 44:6 when speaking of God does not state Alpha and Omega, beginning and end, it simply says first and last Should we therefore conclude that God is not God also, because the other phrases are not mentioned here is this passage? Or should we conclude that the writer means the samething concerning God as he does Christ. The simplest reason i can express for why Alpha and Omega is not a reference to Christ is this... Revelation 1:8 states: The Lord God says, ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the One who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty!’ Jesus is never called the Almighty. Only Jehovah is called the Almighty.
EMA writes: Question Peg. Why do you think John used very spcefic language concerning the fact that, "There is NOTHING made that is MADE, that was not made, by and through him" he is trying to show you who and what Christ is. Its for this reason that we need to know exactly what jesus role in the creation was. This is why Proverbs 8 is such an important passage for understanding that. Jesus was beside God as a master worker, God gave Jesus creative ability and this is why John says that all things came into existence thru him and by him... but tell me this. If the one mentioned in Prov 8 is not Jesus (and its certainly not wisdom because wisdom is someone who can act and think and love) then who is it? Because if its not Jesus, then there is someone greater then Jesus who sat beside God as a master worker. I think Johns words about Jesus being a creator add weight to the identity of the one who was beside God in Prov 8.
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
|
|
Message 297 of 492 (553929)
04-05-2010 7:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 293 by kbertsche
04-05-2010 10:56 AM
|
|
Re: Granville Sharp
kbertsche writes: So it is somewhat questionable whether or not the GS rule should apply to Eph 5:5. If you really want to dispute the validity of the GS rule, you should start with passages which undisputedly meet the requirements for the rule, and show that the rule does not work for these passages. i already did that All the verses that have the same construction (meaning there is a single article preceding two nouns that are joined by the conjunction) i posted in msg 281. Acts 13:50 is a good example of how it doesnt work because there is no way to mistake the women and the men of the city as being the same person.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 293 by kbertsche, posted 04-05-2010 10:56 AM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
Catholic Scientist writes: Do you think he was "a" god? As in polytheism? Or was he just divine like an angel or something? what do you think a god is? Moses was made a god to Pharoah The angel who saved the hebrews from Nebudchudnezzas fire was called a god Jesus was called a god The jews were called gods to the nations god literally means a 'mighty one' in the hebrew language. Yes i believe jesus was a mighty one...just as the angels are mighty ones. It is not polythiestic to believe Jesus was a god...or the angels are gods. They are such because God Almighty makes them such.
Catholic Scientist writes: Well John says that the Word was God and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us (= Jesus) so therefore, Jesus is God. have you done any research into the rendering of John 1:1? Did you know that there are many translations who render the verse as 'a' god.? Are you interested why they render the verse as such?
1808 and the word was a god The New Testament, in An Improved Version, Upon theBasis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London. 1864 and a god was the Word The Emphatic Diaglott (J21, interlinear reading), by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London. 1935 and the Word was divine The BibleAn American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, Chicago. 1950 and the Word was a god New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, Brooklyn. 1975 and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz,Gttingen, Germany. 1978 and godlike sort was the Logos Das Evangelium nach Johannes,by Johannes Schneider,Berlin. 1979 and a god was the Logos Das Evangelium nach Johannes,by Jrgen Becker, Wrzburg, Germany.
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Granville Sharp
kbertsche writes: That's nice, but irrelevant. This does not meet the requirements of the rule as laid down by Granville Sharp. For these requirements, see Re: Granville Sharp (Message 287). quote:Acts 13:50 is a good example of how it doesnt work because there is no way to mistake the women and the men of the city as being the same person. Acts 13:50 is a good example of a verse which does not meet the requirements of the rule as laid down by Granville Sharp. the Granville Sharp rule asserts that, since the article (the) is not repeated before the second noun (Savior), the two nouns refer to the same person or subject. This would mean that great God and Savior would both be descriptive of Jesus, as if the meaning were ‘of Jesus Christ, the great God and our Savior.’ so why don't all translators apply this rule to the verse in titus we are discussing? you havnt answered that yet. And im confused as to what you mean by 'that doesnt meet the requirements of the GS rule' in what way do the scriptures i gave, not meet his requirements??? The construction is the same...so what do you mean? Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 298 by kbertsche, posted 04-05-2010 8:06 PM | | kbertsche has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
EMA writes: So the reason I KNOW he means Alpha and Omega, is because Jesus said, "before Abraham was I AM". this tells me that he is the Alpha and the Omega. that verse that you are using is not translated as 'I AM' by all translators for good reason. We have discussed that verse earlier in this thread.
translations of John 8:58 writes:
Moffatt: I have existed before Abraham was born. Schonfield and An American Translation: I existed before Abraham was born. Stage (German): Before Abraham came to be, I was. Pfaefflin (German): Before there was an Abraham, I was already there! George M. Lamsa, translating from the Syriac Peshitta: Before Abraham was born, I was. Dr.James Murdock, translating from the Syriac Peshitto: Before Abraham existed, I was. The Brazilian Sacred Bible published by the Catholic Bible Center of So Paulo says: Before Abraham existed, I was existing. Also you have to remember that when Jesus spoke to those Jews, he spoke to them in Hebrew, not in Greek. So lets see how the Hebrew scholars who translated into Greek express the same verse
hebrew scholars on John 8:58 writes:
Dr.Franz Delitzsch: Before Abraham was, I have been. Isaac Salkinson and David Ginsburg: I have been when there had as yet been no Abraham. believe me, im not trying to be a smarty pants... my husband might not agree with on that point though hehe.
EMA writes: If Last and first do not refer to Christ as God and IAM, when spoken by Christ, does not mean God, then what is he the IAM of? Is he the IAM of the real IAM here is the clear and simple reason why the I AM of the OT is not the one mentioned by John... In both of the above Hebrew translations, the expression I have been comes from 2 Hebrew words, both a pronoun and a verb - ani hayithi on the other hand, the I AM of the OT uses only 1 Hebrew word: [/b]Ehye'h[/b] Now John wrote the account in Greek, and in the Greek text the expression is Ego' eimi And the expression does mean I am. If you want to know in what sense John meant, he used the same word at John 8:24 & 28. Now check out how the word is rendered in other versions
John 8:24, 28 writes:
NIV: 24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be...28 So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be KJV 24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he...28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he ASV: 24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for except ye believe that I am he... 28 Jesus therefore said, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he EMA writes: Thats why in Revelations 2 you get the condensed statement about first and last, without repeating again, Alpha, Omega, b and E, the Almighty, still refering to the same person So who is this refering to Peg Jesus teaching was based on who the father was. So why do you assume that John is only speaking about Jesus in Revelation. Considering revelation is a vision about the fulfillment of all that God promises, why would John leave the God that Jesus preached about out of the picture?
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
EMA writes: Peg nobody literally sits beside God, that is also anthropomopic thats not really what Luke says in Acts 2:32-35
This Jesus God resurrected ... he was exalted to the right hand of God ... Actually David did not ascend to the heavens, but he himself says, ‘Jehovah said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand, until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet. Do you disagree that Jesus sits at Gods right hand?
|
™ Version 4.2