Another nugget for the Deity of Christ

[Dee Dee Warren]

Gleaned from something I read from NT Wright:

God's perfect will is that there be no man as King over Israel, but Himself only. That was His original desire for Israel, and they disobeyed by demanding a man like the other nations. In Christ is the perfect fulfillment of God's desire that only He should be Israel's King.

[phantaz sunlyk]

speaking of Wright, has anyone been able to get ahold of his new work, The Resurrection of the Son of God? i hear it is outstanding. i pre-ordered it from Amazon in early May, and was just sent a letter saying that they are "unable to obtain" it from any of their dealers.

[Piebald]

I never thought of that! Thanks, Dee Dee!

[John Reece]

Yesterday @ 08:53 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=129997#post129997)
phantaz sunlyk:

speaking of Wright, has anyone been able to get ahold of his new work, The Resurrection of the Son of God? i hear it is outstanding. i pre-ordered it from Amazon in early May, and was just sent a letter saying that they are "unable to obtain" it from any of their dealers.

I recently received a copy from Amazon.com. It is literally too heavy for me to handle this soon after surgery.

When I say "heavy", I mean pounds/ounces :smile: .

[phantaz sunlyk]

when did you order it?

[Tsmith]

Yesterday @ 05:42 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=129889#post129889)
Dee Dee Warren:

Gleaned from something I read from NT Wright:

God's perfect will is that there be no man as King over Israel, but Himself only. That was His original desire for Israel, and they disobeyed by demanding a man like the other nations. In Christ is the perfect fulfillment of God's desire that only He should be Israel's King.

Actually, he promised that David's throne would last forever. And it is in THIS manner that Jesus rules, not as Jehovah himself.

Luk 1:32 This One will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob to the ages, and of His kingdom there will be no end.

So Jesus rules as David, not as Jehovah.

-Tony

[Dee Dee Warren]

That didn't address the argument.

[John Reece]

Today @ 01:14 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130355#post130355)
phantaz sunlyk:

when did you order it?

Date of order: April 5, 2003.

Date of shipment: May 21, 2003 06:52:58 PM Lexington KY USA.

[Tsmith]

Today @ 01:50 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130377#post130377)
Dee Dee Warren:

That didn't address the argument.


You haven't really established a scriptural arguement.

-Tony

[Dee Dee Warren]

Actually I did based upon God's plan for Israel. You skipped it.

[Tsmith]

Today @ 02:20 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130399#post130399)
Dee Dee Warren:

Actually I did based upon God's plan for Israel. You skipped it.

First, you did not provide a single scripture. Second, you did not address the very fact that Jesus is ruling in the manner of David, which was a human king who ruled over the nation while Jehovah was still the highest King. Thus, Jesus, ruling in that manner, still has Jehovah in a kingly position for eternity. Jesus is only said to rule for Jehovah for a period, and after such hand the kingdom back over to Jehovah (1 Cor 15:24-28). It is the Davidic throne that Jesus eternally has.

-Tony

[Dee Dee Warren]

Oh David reigned from Heaven did he? :rofl:

[Tsmith]

Today @ 02:49 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130416#post130416)
Dee Dee Warren:

Oh David reigned from Heaven did he? :rofl:

I fail to see what location has to do with the fact that he reigns in the same manner as David. Scripture say that he does this in black and white.

-Tony

[John Reece]

Today @ 01:49 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130376#post130376)
Tsmith:

Actually, he promised that David's throne would last forever. And it is in THIS manner that Jesus rules, not as Jehovah himself.

Luk 1:32 This One will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob to the ages, and of His kingdom there will be no end.

So Jesus rules as David, not as Jehovah.

-Tony

Really?

Or, one could say that it is as "Jehovah" Jesus rules, not as David (otherwise, he would be ruling as an inferior to Himself):

According to Jesus, David called the Messiah (o CristoV –Mark 12:35)
יהוה (= kurion, indicating that David could not be a forefather of the Messiah (CristoV).

The Messiah does not rule as David; He rules as יהוה.

I submit that as a thesis. Show me by the Hebrew text of Psalm 110 and the Greek text of Mark 12:35-37 that I have misrepresented those texts.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Today @ 09:51 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130418#post130418)
Tsmith:



I fail to see what location has to do with the fact that he reigns in the same manner as David. Scripture say that he does this in black and white.

-Tony

Ruling from heaven is not in the same manner as David. The anti-type is more than the type. God's original intent for Israel was to be their King, not a man. The Messianic plan is not going to be second best. Israel sinned when they clamored for a king like other nations, and that is what you are tryikng to reduce Christ to.

[Tsmith]

Today @ 03:49 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130433#post130433)
John Reece:



Really?

Or, one could say that it is as "Jehovah" Jesus rules, not as David (otherwise, he would be ruling as an inferior to Himself):

According to Jesus, David called the Messiah (o CristoV –Mark 12:35)
יהוה (= kurion, indicating that David could not be a forefather of the Messiah (CristoV).

The Messiah does not rule as David; He rules as יהוה.

I submit that as a thesis. Show me by the Hebrew text of Psalm 110 and the Greek text of Mark 12:35-37 that I have misrepresented those texts.


Psalms 110:1 has YHWH and ADONI. ADONI is there translated MY Lord, not ADONAI. That said, God is never called ADONI and nobody else is ever called ADONAI. KURIOS does not = YHWH. Rather, KURIOS = ADONAI or ADONI. So, Psalms 110:1 is actually good proof against Jesus being Almighty.

[Tsmith]

Today @ 03:52 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130437#post130437)
Dee Dee Warren:



Ruling from heaven is not in the same manner as David. The anti-type is more than the type. God's original intent for Israel was to be their King, not a man. The Messianic plan is not going to be second best. Israel sinned when they clamored for a king like other nations, and that is what you are tryikng to reduce Christ to.

Do you dispute Luke where it says he would rule as David?

I'm just going by what the scripture there says.

[John Reece]

Today @ 04:00 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130440#post130440)
Tsmith:

Psalms 110:1 has YHWH and ADONI. ADONI is there translated MY Lord, not ADONAI. That said, God is never called ADONI and nobody else is ever called ADONAI. KURIOS does not = YHWH. Rather, KURIOS = ADONAI or ADONI. So, Psalms 110:1 is actually good proof against Jesus being Almighty.

Your are quite wrong. Want me to demonstrate that fact?

[Tsmith]

Today @ 01:23 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130609#post130609)
John Reece:



Your are quite wrong. Want me to demonstrate that fact?



Waiting waiting waiting. But I'm not wrong on this...

[John Reece]

Today @ 03:38 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130659#post130659)
Tsmith:

Waiting waiting waiting. But I'm not wrong on this...

:smile:

Thanks for opening yourself up for a response from me.


Tsmith:

[quote]Tsmith:
KURIOS does not = YHWH.

The LXX uses KURIOS quite consistently to render YHWH. The LXX text of Psalm 110:1 renders YHWH by means of KURIOS.

The opening words of Psalm 110:1 in the LXX are Eipen o KurioV tw Kuriw mou. The word in red is the rendering for YHWH.

If you understand Greek lexical formations, you see in the text quoted that KURIOS is used twice in the quote: once to render YHWH, and once to render ADONI.

However, I think you are right: KURION in Mark 12:37 was not a reference to YHWH but to ADONI. So you win regarding that point.

Blessings,

John

[Tsmith]

Today @ 06:40 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130771#post130771)
John Reece:



:smile:

Thanks for opening yourself up for a response from me.



The LXX uses KURIOS quite consistently to render YHWH. The LXX text of Psalm 110:1 renders YHWH by means of KURIOS.

The opening words of Psalm 110:1 in the LXX are Eipen o KurioV tw Kuriw mou. The word in red is the rendering for YHWH.

If you understand Greek lexical formations, you see in the text quoted that KURIOS is used twice in the quote: once to render YHWH, and once to render ADONI.

However, I think you are right: KURION in Mark 12:37 was not a reference to YHWH but to ADONI. So you win regarding that point.

Blessings,

John

I think you missed my point. I don't dispute that YHWH is translated as KURIOS in the LXX at times (some LXX texts contain YHWH). My dispute is that YHWH = KURIOS. I'm simply saying they are not the same, where as ADON is the same as KURIOS.

-Tony

[John Reece]

Today @ 06:59 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130782#post130782)
Tsmith:

I think you missed my point. I don't dispute that YHWH is translated as KURIOS in the LXX at times (some LXX texts contain YHWH). My dispute is that YHWH = KURIOS. I'm simply saying they are not the same, where as ADON is the same as KURIOS.

-Tony

Well, you are arguing against what I have never argued for. Of course YHWH does not = KURIOS. I had not been very careful in reading, so I was mistaken it writing that KURION in Mark 12:37 was a representation of YHWH.

I have only recently resumed studies discontinued years ago, and my memory is not very good. So everything I'm doing now is like a re-learning process.

I don't remember any LXX text that uses YHWH. I'd be interested in seeing that. Can you provide a reference?

Blessings,

John

[Tsmith]

Today @ 07:16 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130787#post130787)
John Reece:



Well, you are arguing against what I have never argued for. Of course YHWH does not = KURIOS. I had not been very careful in reading, so I was mistaken it writing that KURION in Mark 12:37 was a representation of YHWH.

I have only recently resumed studies discontinued years ago, and my memory is not very good. So everything I'm doing now is like a re-learning process.

I don't remember any LXX text that uses YHWH. I'd be interested in seeing that. Can you provide a reference?

Blessings,

John


We are probably working from a misunderstanding then. My apologies.

As for the LXX, in P Fouad 266, one of the three mss contain the tetragrammaton in Aramaic script. 8HevXIIgr contains it in Hebrew and 4QLXXLev has it as IAW.

-Tony

[Cal_Minian]

Yesterday @ 05:50 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130377#post130377)
Dee Dee Warren:

That didn't address the argument.

Dear DeeDee,
Perhaps it does not address argument of NT Wright. I noticed that you did not quote him quoting Scripture. However Tony cut directly to the heart of the issue by quoting Scripture.

I guess the NT in NT Wright does not stand for New Testament :)

Regards,
Cal

[John Reece]

Today @ 01:46 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131023#post131023)
Cal_Minian:

Dear DeeDee,
Perhaps it does not address argument of NT Wright. I noticed that you did not quote him quoting Scripture. However Tony cut directly to the heart of the issue by quoting Scripture.

I guess the NT in NT Wright does not stand for New Testament :)

Regards,
Cal

Dee Dee does not quote NT Wright quoting scripture. On that basis, an assumption is made: “I guess the NT in NT Wright does not stand for New Testament :)”.

I just checked the index of scriptures in the back of N. T. Wright’s The Resurrection of the Son of God. Wright quotes approximately 2,000 New Testament verses, many of them multiple times.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Let me also make plain my intentions in starting this thread. It was targeted towars those who already accept Christ's deity as a "wow, that is a cool thing" type of thing. It wasn't meant to stir up debate or I would have typed out NT Wright's paragraphs surreounding this. It was a nugget for edification of the Trinitarians. It wasn't meant to be comprehensive. For those who already accdept the truth about who Christ is, the way this fits in gives goosebumps, and that is all it was for.

[Cal_Minian]

Today @ 06:38 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131040#post131040)
John Reece:



Dee Dee does not quote NT Wright quoting scripture. On that basis, an assumption is made: “I guess the NT in NT Wright does not stand for New Testament :)”.

I just checked the index of scriptures in the back of N. T. Wright’s The Resurrection of the Son of God. Wright quotes approximately 2,000 New Testament verses, many of them multiple times.

Dear DeeDee,
I was sure that he did, but what I was hoping for was the Scriptural backing for the statement you quoted from him.

Regards,
Cal

[Cal_Minian]

Today @ 06:41 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131041#post131041)
Dee Dee Warren:

Let me also make plain my intentions in starting this thread. It was targeted towars those who already accept Christ's deity as a "wow, that is a cool thing" type of thing. It wasn't meant to stir up debate or I would have typed out NT Wright's paragraphs surreounding this. It was a nugget for edification of the Trinitarians. It wasn't meant to be comprehensive. For those who already accdept the truth about who Christ is, the way this fits in gives goosebumps, and that is all it was for.


Dear DeeDee,
I get goosebumps when I see a valid Scriptural application!

Best Regards,
Cal

[OldShepherd]

Yesterday @ 10:49 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130376#post130376)
Tsmith:

Actually, he promised that David's throne would last forever. And it is in THIS manner that Jesus rules, not as Jehovah himself.

Luk 1:32 This One will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob to the ages, and of His kingdom there will be no end.

So Jesus rules as David, not as Jehovah.

-Tony

No, no, no, this is not true. This is "eisegesis," reading into the text. As you have stated Jesus was given the throne of David, His father, i.e. ancestor, the verse does NOT say anything about "how" Jesus will reign. For example, Isa 9:6 shows a big difference between Jesus' reign and David's, "with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever" David's reign did NOT have anything "from henceforth and even for ever." and David's reign ended.
Isa 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

[Tsmith]

Today @ 05:29 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131131#post131131)
OldShepherd:



No, no, no, this is not true. This is "eisegesis," reading into the text. As you have stated Jesus was given the throne of David, His father, i.e. ancestor, the verse does NOT say anything about "how" Jesus will reign. For example, Isa 9:6 shows a big difference between Jesus' reign and David's, "with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever" David's reign did NOT have anything "from henceforth and even for ever." and David's reign ended.
Isa 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Not at all, considering that the throne that David passed on was said to last forever (Psalms 45:6). The point still remains, the kingship Jesus has is the throne of David that he rules from forever, not the throne of Jehovah.

[John Reece]

"Convince a **** against his will, he's of the same opinion still", my Mom used to say :smile: .

Presuppositions are strongholds in the minds of men: impregnable fortresses against any perceived threat against preconceived opinions.

[Reasonable]

Today @ 01:49 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131381#post131381)
John Reece:

"Convince a **** against his will, he's of the same opinion still", my Mom used to say :smile: .

Presuppositions are strongholds in the minds of men: impregnable fortresses against any perceived threat against preconceived opinions.

I don't know of anyone in this forum that this can't be said of!

[John Reece]

Today @ 03:50 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131466#post131466)
Reasonable:

I don't know of anyone in this forum that this can't be said of!

Presuppositions are a part of human nature. Are you familiar with the phenomenon of what happens to human nature “at the Cross”?

[Reasonable]

Today @ 04:37 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131486#post131486)
John Reece:



Presuppositions are a part of human nature. Are you familiar with the phenomenon of what happens to human nature “at the Cross”?

Not sure I understand your question, John.

[AVmetro]

Dee Dee cited:

Gleaned from something I read from NT Wright:

God's perfect will is that there be no man as King over Israel, but Himself only. That was His original desire for Israel, and they disobeyed by demanding a man like the other nations. In Christ is the perfect fulfillment of God's desire that only He should be Israel's King.


Cal_Minion replied:

Cal_Minion states:

Dear DeeDee,
Perhaps it does not address argument of NT Wright. I noticed that you did not quote him quoting Scripture. However Tony cut directly to the heart of the issue by quoting Scripture.

It only makes sense:

1Sa 10:18-19 - "And he said to the sons of Israel, So says Jehovah, the God of Israel, I brought up Israel out of Egypt, and delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of all kingdoms, of those who oppressed you. And you have this day rejected your God who Himself saved you out of all your calamities and your tribulations. And you have said to Him, But set a king over us."

1Sa 12:12 - "And when you saw that Nahash the king of the sons of Ammon came against you, you said to me, No, but a king shall reign over us, even though Jehovah your God was your King." [MKJV]

Then take into consideration that Christ is the Lamb "slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev13:8) and you'll see that this was more than a mere "mishap" :smile:. NT Wright's argument makes perfect sense logically. If Christ is the fulfillment of perfect reconciliation to YHWH then mankind would no longer need a King representative. The title "first and last" is rather appropriate here.


Actually, he promised that David's throne would last forever. And it is in THIS manner that Jesus rules, not as Jehovah himself.

But how does this negate the argument? Christ is of the seed of David and also His being {the} God. You seem to posit that His humanity must necessitate the exclusion of any possibility of His ruling AS God.


Psalms 110:1 has YHWH and ADONI. ADONI is there translated MY Lord, not ADONAI. That said, God is never called ADONI and nobody else is ever called ADONAI. KURIOS does not = YHWH. Rather, KURIOS = ADONAI or ADONI. So, Psalms 110:1 is actually good proof against Jesus being Almighty.

Correct me if I'm mistaken but weren't the vowel points which differentiate between 'adoni' and 'adonai' implemented post-Christ. Somewhere around 400 A.D. if I remember correctly (?) In light of this, the above argument holds little relevance.


Not at all, considering that the throne that David passed on was said to last forever (Psalms 45:6). The point still remains, the kingship Jesus has is the throne of David that he rules from forever, not the throne of Jehovah.

Isn't "throne" here taken as more 'symbolic' of ''rule'' i.e. in the sense of a fulfillment of
Rom1:3?

God bless

[Dee Dee Warren]

Very good points Metro, and some very interesting things are going on in Psalm 110 that I could point out. But you pointed out the Scriptural theme that Wright was buiding on. It is quite an anemic view of Scripture that does not recognize the overarching redemptive themes that cannot be boiled down to picking at nits in isolated proof texts. Wright was going through the whole theme of messianic strands in Christ's ministry and how He revolutionized the prevailing ideas of the Jews then about what/who Messiah would be, yet today, some of the same errors of the Jews are being repeated. God gaves us Himself, and some still want a mere man.

[Tsmith]

Today @ 08:54 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=132937#post132937)
IronMetro:





It only makes sense:

1Sa 10:18-19 - "And he said to the sons of Israel, So says Jehovah, the God of Israel, I brought up Israel out of Egypt, and delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of all kingdoms, of those who oppressed you. And you have this day rejected your God who Himself saved you out of all your calamities and your tribulations. And you have said to Him, But set a king over us."

1Sa 12:12 - "And when you saw that Nahash the king of the sons of Ammon came against you, you said to me, No, but a king shall reign over us, even though Jehovah your God was your King." [MKJV]

Then take into consideration that Christ is the Lamb "slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev13:8) and you'll see that this was more than a mere "mishap" :smile:. NT Wright's argument makes perfect sense logically. If Christ is the fulfillment of perfect reconciliation to YHWH then mankind would no longer need a King representative. The title "first and last" is rather appropriate here.



But how does this negate the argument? Christ is of the seed of David and also His being {the} God. You seem to posit that His humanity must necessitate the exclusion of any possibility of His ruling AS God.


Well we can take your theory and apply it, though it is only a theory and has no solid basis. Or we can take what Luke actually says in that Jesus will rule on David's throne. I have preference to going with what scripture actually states than from trying to put 2 and 2 together.



Correct me if I'm mistaken but weren't the vowel points which differentiate between 'adoni' and 'adonai' implemented post-Christ. Somewhere around 400 A.D. if I remember correctly (?) In light of this, the above argument holds little relevance.

While correct, if we want to reject this as ADONI, then we have to reject our entire understanding of Hebrew today and so we must then throw out or OT scripture. We can't have it both ways.


-Tony

[jpholding]

I am glad to see Tony pulling the same hijinks in this thread as he does with me elsewhere.

Carry on. :salute:

[John Reece]

06-23-2003 @ 04:00 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130440#post130440)
Tsmith:

Psalms 110:1 has YHWH and ADONI. ADONI is there translated MY Lord, not ADONAI. That said, God is never called ADONI and nobody else is ever called ADONAI. KURIOS does not = YHWH. Rather, KURIOS = ADONAI or ADONI. So, Psalms 110:1 is actually good proof against Jesus being Almighty.

Tsmith,

I just happened to notice David's use of ADONI in Psalm 62:13 (Hebrew text, verse 12 in English versions). To whom was David speaking?

[AVmetro]

Well we can take your theory and apply it, though it is only a theory and has no solid basis. Or we can take what Luke actually says in that Jesus will rule on David's throne. I have preference to going with what scripture actually states than from trying to put 2 and 2 together.

That is, putting ''2'' and ''2'' together to get "4" :smile:. I have no objections to Christ ruling on David's throne. That was part of the point.


While correct, if we want to reject this as ADONI, then we have to reject our entire understanding of Hebrew today and so we must then throw out or OT scripture. We can't have it both ways.

You've overshot my point. I was pointing out that the vowel points are not inspired ergo the delineation you latch onto in this instance is irrelevant. The decision to implement vowel points in the case of distinguishing 'adoni' and 'adonai' is strictly up to the opinion of the translator. This taking place relatively long after Christ.

God bless

[OldShepherd]

Yesterday @ 03:44 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=133271#post133271)
Tsmith:

While correct, if we want to reject this as ADONI, then we have to reject our entire understanding of Hebrew today and so we must then throw out or OT scripture. We can't have it both ways.

-Tony

We have other ways, beside the Massoretic pointing, of determining the Hebrew text. The LXX and ECF for example. This is tantamount to saying, "If you discount my favorite "proof text" then lets just throw out the entire Bible." Or we could use common sense and reason. How many other doctrinal issues rest on whether or not ONE (1) word was pointed, with a "qamets" or a "hirek"? Ever hear of a"matres lectionis"?

[Trinitarian]

Since there's been some discussion about NT Wright and his new Book The Resurrection of the Son of God I just thought that I'd mention that the Bookstore and Publishing Company that I work for have many in stock still (discounted 20%). You can order from us at www.theologybooks.com

[mercia]

06-23-2003 @ 01:49 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=130376#post130376)
Tsmith:



Actually, he promised that David's throne would last forever. And it is in THIS manner that Jesus rules, not as Jehovah himself.

Luk 1:32 This One will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob to the ages, and of His kingdom there will be no end.

So Jesus rules as David, not as Jehovah.

-Tony


Thus God tells us He will, “destroy those who destroy the earth”. And those who destroy the earth are those who are carnally minded. Which has the same meaning as the “image of the beast”. And this is now almost all of us.
And the root cause of this is perception. And perception is interrelated with action or effect. And the carnal mind cannot perceive, nor does he wish too – how this all began. Because it is all interelated and was already revealed by the Jews theological mistakes which they exposed prior the First Advent (in how they perceived the prophecies of the coming of their Messiah). And Lord Jesus continued (spending much of His ministry exposing). Which we never learned from, thus we too reduced, extrpolated in one mode (which is as always the one that suits our carnal plans) and separated. And the carnal mind seperates everything he is called to unite.
Thus God is seperated from creation, faith from charity, Jesus from the Father, the soul from the body, the literal sense of the Word from the spiritual. And what is beyond the understanding of the senses is reduced into one mode. And what is unreducable is seperated. And yet the carnal man cannot perceive all this is in itself a test! Perhaps the test! Especially for those living in these last days. He cannot understand that this is why the Word is written as it is. And just as the Jews failed to understand this lesson. So Christianity is the last days failed to perceive this – and the result – “the earth lies pollutted under its inhabitants thereof”. Yet we have their example, as exposed by Lord Jesus (if truly perceived), and so we have no excuses for what we have done (because we are carnal). As this carnal mindset (the image of the beast) is the root cause of what ultimately destoys the earth. Yet he will never perceive this! Nor wish too. Thus what we are called to unite what we cannot help but separate! So we make three God’s or two Gods, when there is but one God, “these three are one”, yet still in thought we divide the Divine essence into three, which is yet indivisible. And the leading men of the Church have taught that men should pray to the Father, that for the Son’s sake He would send the Holy Spirit, by which their idea of Three has been confirmed, although He alone as to His Humanity is Righteousness (Jer. Xxiii. 5 5, 6, xxxiii. 15,) is called “Jehovah our Righteousness”. And because they are carnal and because they seperatate and reduce and extrapolate in one mode like the Jews without bringing both together, they cannot even understand that this was the great lesson of the First Advent, not only did Lord Jesus come to expose the fact that the Jews could only separate and reduce, and therefore extrapolate upon their Scripture in one mode. But in the very teaching of Him and the Father being two but yet one was hidden the ultimate test and continuation of this lesson! Yet who can perceive it? Surely we have learnt nothing from their mistakes! Nothing! And because this seperation and reduction and extrapolation in one mode is the manifestation of the carnally minded – they fail the ultimate test. No! They cannot even perceive it! From this idea of their thought it has come to pass that they cannot comprehend, although they have heard and read, “all things that the Father hath are Mine” (John xvi. 15). The Father hath given all things into the hand of the Son” (xiii. 3). “Father thou hast given me power over all flesh; all Mine are Thine, and Thine are Mine” (xvii. 2, 3, 10). “All power is given unto Me is heaven and in earth” (Matt. Xxviii. 18). Also that He was conceived of God the Father and hence that His soul was from Him (Luke i. 34, 35, 38); and hence, the Divine Essence was His; besides many other things of the same import in other passages. Anyone may perceive that all this was said of the Lord who was born into the world, as also that “He and the Father are one; and that He is in the Father and the Father in Him;” and that “he who seeth Him seeth the Father”. Besides much more, and in the Old Testement. “Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given, and the government shall be on His shoulder, and His name shall be called Wonderful Couseller, the Mighty God, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, the Prince of peace” (isa. Ix. 6). “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call His name IMMANUEL – GOD WITH US” (Vii. 14). “Behold, the days come, that I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a king shall reign and prosper; and this is His name whereby He shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS” (Jer. Xxiii. 5, 6, xxxiii. 15, 16). “And it shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God, we have waited for Him, and He will be save us; THIS IS JEHOVAH, WE HAVE WAITED FOR HIM; we will be glad and rejoice in our salvation.” (Isa. xxv 9) “Surely God is in thee; and there is none else, there is no other God; verily, Thou art a God that hidest Thyself, O’ GOD OF ISRAEL, THE SAVIOUR” (xlv. 14, 15). “Am I not JEHOVAH, AND BESIDE ME THERE IS NO SAVIOUR (Xliii. II). “I AM JEHOVAH, AND BESIDE ME THERE IS NO SAVIOUR” (Xliii. II). “Am I not Jehovah? And there is no God beside Me; a JUST GOD AND A SAVIOUR; THERE IS NONE BESIDE ME” (Xlv. 21, 22). “Thou Jehovah art our FATHER OUR REDEEMER; Thy name is everaslting” (Isa. 1xiii. 16). “Thus saith JEHOVAH THY REDEEMER, I am Jehovah that maketh all things, and alone by myself” (Xliv. 24) And in many other places, like Zechariah, “IN THAT DAY JEHOVAH SHALL BE KING OVER ALL THE EARTH; IN THAT DAY SHALL THERE BE ONE JEHOVAH AND HIS NAME ONE”, and since they are one it speaks in another place of the name of God and the Lamb being written on their foreheads. Now, although they may have heard and read these passages, yet they cannot give up the idea which is long conveived and afterwards confirmed by others which has closed up their minds that they are unable to see or understand these words of the Lord, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man cometh unto the Father but my Me” (John xiv. 6). “he that entereth not by the door into the sheep-fold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a theif and a robber; I am the door, by Me, if any man enter in, he shall be saved” (x. I, 9). Also that the Lord glorified His Humanity, that is, united it to the Divinity of the Father, or, to the Divinity which was in Himself from conception, that the human race might be united to God the Father in Him and through Him. That this was the reason of the Lord’s coming into the world, and of the glorification of His Humanity, He fully teaches in John; for He says, “At that day ye shall know that I am in the Father, and ye in Me, and I in you” (xiv. 20) “he that adideth in Me and I in Him, the same bringeth forth much fruit; for without Me ye can do nothing: if a man abide not in Me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered” (xv. 5, 6). “And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth, that they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee; and I in them and Thou in Me” (Xvii. 19, 21, 23, 26; also 56; and in other places). It clearly appears in these passages that the Lords coming into the World and the glorification of His Humanity, had for their end the conjunction of men with God the Father “in Him and through Him.” Who cannot see that all this is said by the Lord concerning Himself in His Humanity; and that unless His Humanity was Divine, He never would have said, nor could say, that He was in men and men were in Him, and that it was necessary to believe in Him, that they might have eternal life? To ask the Father in His name, does not mean to approach God the Father immediately, nor to ask for His sake, but to approach the Lord, and the Father through Him, because the Father is in the Son, and they are one, as He Himself teaches. This is what in HIS NAME signifies; as may appear from these passages; “He that believeth not in the Son is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the NAME OF THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD” (John iii. 18). “These things are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that BELIEVING YE MIGHT HAVE LIFE THROUGH HIS NAME” (John xx. 31). Jesus said, “Whoseover shall receive a child in MY NAME receiveth Me; and whoseover SHALL RECEIVE ME RECEIVETH HIM THAT SENT ME” (Luke ix. 48). Whatsoever YE SHALL ASK IN MY NAME, THAT WILL I DO” (John xiv. 13). There are atleast 25 other passages besides these that say “IN THE NAME OF THE LORD”. And what is meant by the name of God, and the name of the Father is the Lord as to the Divine Humanity. “From the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same, My NAME shall be great among the Gentiles” and in many dozen other places correspondingly.

Thus the carnal mind seperates and reduces, the spiritual mind unites. Which is why the Word is as it is – in two modes. And is why the ultimate and final test of this is embedded in the Lords words, “I and the Father are one”. This being the ultimate of all lessons we should have learned from the Jews, from their mistakes, as revealed in the teachings and ministry of Jesus. Which is why the final test and lesson of all that the Jews failed to understand culminated in how we perceive these words, “I and the Father are one”. If only we could have perceived it! And this is why I saw what I did 18 years ago. And what that revealed be extension, is what the mystery revealed and emphatically asserted in the fulfillemt of end time Bible Prophecy . (And our very salvation depends upon perceiving it).

The problem in these last days is we have pollutted the Word in Egypt, because we have pollutted our minds in Egypt and thus got so used to seperation, reductionism and thus simplification and extrapolation in one mode. We want answers – we want dogma! And therfore reductionism becomes our greatest ally! And we say things like, “we do not understand this, and cannot accept not being able to understand it”. So we separate, because seperation is easy to understand, or reduce, that is something in two modes into one (without bringing both modes together into one) because it is so often preferable. One is made war upon and the other is exptrapolated. But what we are really doing and saying, as will be observed by angels who judge all things by our perception and response to the Word, is exalting ourselves to the level of the Infinite, by perceiving that because we cannot understand unity or understand our call to unite (or understand what is beyond the level of our senses) and hidden from Egypt, and because we cannot understand that which is infinite then we must reduce it and/or separate it so we do understand it.

[mercia]

Because we feel that if we cannot understand it “this is just is unnacceptable”, as I have read, that is “unnaceptable” to God or ourselves I wonder? And as religion has a burning urge to create dogma. And dogma is best achieved through reductionism (and extrapolating upon a dominant linear mode – as Egypt does, that is science), - this was known 18 years ago. So because we refuse to perceive that we may not be able to understand something that is infinite. Although we may agree that we cannot – still our actions and dogma and even our words exposes that we just cannot accept this. Yet are we God? And what do we reveal of ourselves to those watching when we say and think such things? The finite cannot comprehend the infinite in a materialistic and mechanical way. Yet the things we write and theories we extrapolate sometimes imply we can, and if we cannot, then we imply it cannot be so! But why? Why can it not be so? Because it is beyond the level and the understanding of our senses? Our intellect? Can we pick and choose what we believe? Can we reduce Scripture into one mode when we prefer to do so? Or is it because it is beyond the wisdom and understanding of Egypt? Can the arm of God be seperate from His Body? Can His wisdom be seperated and deified as fourth person in the God head? Or seperated from God entirely on account of the Shema and the fact the O.T personies it [this is wisdom].
What we had either failed to understand (or truly believe) is that – it was God’s will as declared by the apostles to always keep such things hidden from the wisdom, perception and understanding of Egypt (and thus those who trust in Egypt, that is science, wisdom and perception of natural man). And the Church of God is supposed to be wise in this respect, “to the intent that the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God” (Eph. 3:10), thus trusting in God and not in the wisdom of Egypt! But the Church trusts in the wisdom of Egypt in some respects and the Word in others, it is half natural, half spiritual, and confused as to its perceptions between the two (but Egypt is confounded in every respect when it treats of the spiritual) - that is to say - the carnal mind (it was never meant to comprehend). And although we believed that we did not trust in Egypt. The principles applied to convince ourselves of what we did not want to believe revealed that we did (reductionism, linear perception, extrapolation on one linear mode) to confirm a pressupposition we have already started with - as a scientist would. Yet the Word of God is not in one dominant linear mode!
We only become willing partners in this self deception when we apply the principles of science and reduce something in two modes into one and give to ourselves and others the overwhelming impression that only one applies. Only if we believe these words can we again become truly wise in every respect to the things hidden from the wisdom of Egypt, “if any man seem wise among you, let him become a fool that he many be wise”. And I have seen that this is so! As i have seen Satan exists with my very eyes! Yet certain latter day churches who cannot perceive they are theological reductionists, make the mode that reveals this, dissapear by reducing to mere personificiation! Why? Because of the love of dogma more easily received and achieved! If one does not want to believe something in two modes (natural/literal, spiritual/symbollic) all that church has to do is make one mode dissapeat BY GIVING THE OVERWHELMING IMPRESSION THAT ONLY ONE MODE APPLIES !! And where else have they done this? THEOLOGICAL REDUCTIONISM IS A ABOMINATION!
So if this has been hidden from us in these last days, (and hidden from ourselves because we reduced and extrapolated in one mode) as science does – then what else has God hidden from the wisdom and principles of Egypt? As he said Egypt would never help, it would never prosper - and that our allegiance with it would be our shame! That is why the Word is in two modes! Yet Egypt extrapolates in one linear mode! So when such principles are applied to the WORD OF GOD theological spiritual insanity prevails! Yet can they perceive this is so? No of course not! Because the one mode they will have extrapolated upon will be correct! It is just the other mode will be denied! Yet first they have to be able to perceive what they are doing MAY GOD OPEN THEIR EYES AND ALLOW THEM TO PROSPER. This is what happens when you make mental allegiances with Egypt (the science and wisdom of natural man), and then bring the principles of this whoredom with the world through pressuppositions to the Word. The result - spiritual insanity - molten images of Egypt. All formed according to their own understanding from the information derived at the level of their senses in which they trust.
, “everyman in brutish [carnal] by his knowledge”, “and every founder is confounded by the graven image: for his molten image is falsehood,..They are vanity [moulded for the love of religion, that is dogma more easily achieved by the carnal mind], the work of errors: in the time of visitation they shall perish”. These fishers of people from Egypt, catch them by appealing to their natural minds. They fish them with doctrines of vanity, that claim there is no devil (as we are too clever to believe in this anymore), that electricity is the Holy Spirit (as we are liked serpents who lick the dust, are blind and trust only the information they receive at the level of their senses).
The idols of Babylon signifty dominion over holy things (the Word) due to the love of self, while the idols of this age (the effects or “wages” of Babylon, Ezek 29:19) that have deceived the nations are relation to the spirit of these last days which is the spirit of Egypt (which is the spirit of natural man who is in the image of the beast), and Egypts materialistic science (the science and wisdom of natural man) represent the churches latter day idols according to this spirit - all according to our own understand from the wisdom of natural man derived at the level of his senses in which we trust (the science and wisdom of natural man), who therefore purposes to believe as little as possible that does not accord with the wisdom derived at the level of his senses in which he trusts. And these are idols “all according to their own understanding”;“Idols ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN UNDERSTANDING, the work of craftsmen”. And formed accordingly from the self derived intelligence of natural man“Graven images are the WORK OF HANDS of the workmen; they speak not they are altogether BRUTISH and FOOLISH”. And as they are formed and moulded to appeal to their own intellect and the wisdom of the age derived at the level of their senses in which they trust, it is said “ the stock is a DOCTRINE OF VANITIES; they are the work of CUNNING MEN”, “They are VANITY, the works of errors: in the time of their visitation they shall perish.”, “What profiteth the graven image, that the maker and a teacher of lies hath graven it, that the maker of his work TRUSTETH THEREIN.”, and wisdom derived at the level of our senses in which we trust (being imbued as to that degree), and being deceived by the wisdom of Egypt (the secular science of these last days), which can have nothing whatsoever to do with the Word as will be seen. It is these presuppositions that the man of the world brings to the Word in the latter days that results in vomit (and that is a result of manifesting the image of the beast), the PRIDE of the drunkards of Ephraim (due to the self derived intelligence of natural man and the pride of it due to the perception that his knowledge – in these last days has increased), when as yet it is insane in that which has been kept hidden from the level of his senses or the spirit of Egypt in which he trusts, and in which trust is to be his shame, which is why I saw what I did in 1982, considering who it was for, and in what context I was told I would have to write. This is also why Jesus, speaking to the Church of Loadicia which typifies the Church of the last days says “because thou sayest, I am rich and increased in riches [or because you say our knowledge has increased] and have need of nothing, and knowest not thou art wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked” (Rev 3:17), or because they are acting from self derived intelligence and the pride of it which is the spirit of these last days (due to natural mans perception that his knowledge has increased in all that has been kept hidden from Egypt or the level of his senses). So the latter day church absolutely believe corporativly that they alone hold beliefs true to the latter days when the rather their allegiance with the same spirit and trust in it (the science and wisdom of natural man), has deceived that church in all that treats of the spiritual, or what has been kept hidden from the wisdom of Egypt, and their wisdom derived at the level of the senses as this is what the Lord had purposed he would do from the very beginning (Isa 30:8), just as the same spirit has deceived the secular world (in as much they don’t even believe in a God anymore – and because of it – yet also claim that their knowledge has increased). Further - it is because the church of these last days act from self derived intelligence, and the pride of it, due to the perception that their latter day knowledge has increased “because thou sayest I am rich [knowledgable] and in need of nothing”, that in the next verse the Lord warns them to stop acting from self derived intelligence lest they see not see spritual truths anymore in the Word at all, and therefore says “I counsel thee to buy of Me” (Rev 3:17), “gold” (which signifies the highest form of spiritual knowledge/riches) “tried in fire” (after denying oneself through trial like Daniel) so that “thou mayest be rich” (so you may receive true spiritual wisdom from heaven). So while this typifies the deception and true effect of Romes wine in the latter day Church, or the Church that emerged in the latter days. So also in the secular world it is this spiritual insanity or lack of knowledge that results in the Lord saying that the “nations are mad” (in all that treats of the spiritual) or what has been kept hidden from beyond the level of his senses which he trusts (God).
This the true effect of Rome. For the “wages” or effect of Babylon is the spirit of Egypt - the image of the beast (natural man) and natural man is a spiritual Egyptian (which is the spirit of these latter days) who then makes his own idols and false doctrines, “all according to their own understanding” from the wisdom derived at the level of his senses in which he accords as much as possible in the Word, (to the level and the testimony of his senses due to the science and wisdom of natural man) in which he trusts, and shows by this example that he does (atleast in part) yet which deceives him (or that church) in all that treats of what God has hidden from the wisdom of Egypt (as this is what he has purposed upon Egypt), “Where are they? Where are thy wise men? And let them tell thee now, and let them know what the Lord hath purposed upon Egypt” (Isaiah 19:12); “for the EGYPTIANS shall help in vain, and to know purpose…now go write it on a tablet, and note it in a book, that it may be for a time to come FOR EVER AND EVER” (Isa. 30:8). ). This is the the spirit of the False Prophet that has deceived all nations (and the context of the lie), the science and wisdom of natural man. And our trust in it (the Churches) is to be our shame, “therefore shall the strength of PHARAOH be your shame, and the trust in the shadow of EGYPT your confusion” (Isaiah 30:3)
This is why the angel calls them wicked as this perception is the perception of the image of the beast, and to perceive it in the image of the world, shows those who are watching that we are drunk of Romes wine, “WOE UNTO THEM who are WISE IN THEIR OWN EYES, and prudent in their own sight!…MIGHTY TO DRINK WINE, and men of strength to mingle strong drink” (Is 5:22), this is the effect of Rome. And this is why the nations are mad - that is - spritually insane!


Why is it that modern carnal man, cannot comprehend beyond one dominant mode? Yet says its knowledge has increased! As if this could ever be applied the theology or the Word! that is not in one linear mode! Is it not the case that billions are perishing because they received not the love of the truth, (because they cant see God in Creation anymore), as they get confused beyond one dominant linear mode?
Egypt (the principles of science and natural man) operates by extrapolating upon a dominant linear mode and restricting all perception, and subsequent questions and answers to this one mode. (Whilst giving the overwhelming impression that this is the only mode that applies). Which is why tens of millions of people in the West can no longer (perceive) God’s existance revealed in Creation anymore (Rom. 1:20). And which is why atheists get confused beyond one mode of perception and draw attention to what has been explained as to try and disprove God’s existance, as in ‘as we are so much nearer understanding how the universe works and how it began, there is no need to invoke the idea of a Supreme Creator’, as if the physical explanations of an invention makes it impossible to believe in an inventor! Or as if when you uncover the mechanism of a micro-circuit you suddenly come across its maker as you sort out the last piece of circuitry. Yet the popular media as a result of Huxley’s ‘New Reformation’ implies similar things when they claim that scientific explanations of the origins of the universe, for example, rule out a Maker. And this is because at around the turn of this unique century, science (the science and wisdom of natural man) very conciously sought to bring about the “secularisation of society” (the X Club, Royal Society) by imitating and thereby restricting all perception to one mode only, (which is Secondary Cause/Perception). And while Isaac Newton and others would talk of ‘Secondary Cause’ and ‘Primary Cause’ as exemplified by some of his letters in which he would write “the Rotations of the Planets could not be derived from gravity, but require a Divine Arm to impress them”, and in which the Big Bang would be ‘Primary cause’, modern science whilst seeking “power, dominion and great glory” has very succesfully limted all perception to Secondary Cause only (one mode), and millions cannot (perceive beyond it), and therefore perceive God’s existance revealed in creation, God being in the Primary (Rom 1:20). In the words of Professor White this has “deeply etched itself into the international conciousness, precisely as intended”. The self delusion of it all is in the apparent fact that millions seem to get mentally frustrated by things that cannot be explained in one mode, (including the latter day church). And now millions cannot perceive beyond one dominant mode due to the spirit of Egypt (the science and wisdom of natural man) and therefore perceive God’s existance in the Primary, as science aided by the popular media has given the overwhelming impression that only one mode applies – and we will see that this has enormous prophetic significance.

Such principles and pressuppositions brought to the Word in these last days represents the deception of Babylon, (the aspect of which that has affected us all), the pride of perceived intelligence, and the principles and presupositions of Egypt (the science and wisdom of natural man) being the deception only now fully grown, (the wages of Babylon being Egypt) from which all such latter day molten images are formed. Yet these pressupositions and principles are being brought to the Word in these latter days by those of us who were most sure we were going to be saved, while embracing the spirit of Egypt in principles and pressuposition brought from the world, whilst applying them to the Word, which is why it is said that,“those who uphold Egypt” (the science and wisdom of natural man) in principles applied to the Word or pressupsoitions brought to the Word “shall fall” (Ezek. 30:6), and which is why it is said, “I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will overthow the CHARIOTS and those who RIDE IN THEM.” (Hag. ii. 22) and that we truly believed (myself included) that we were right and everyone else (the last 2000 years of Christianity) was wrong, while applying the principles of Egypt (the spirit that is to be brought down) and the pressupostions of Egypt derived at the level of the senses to form and mould such doctrines in line with the wisdom of Egypt, is all part of the same spirit as will be seen. (Ezek 31:14)


Is it not the case that the observed manifestation of the carnal mind is the failure to perceive beyond one mode? And that it is this that leads to all spiritual insanity and theological madness in the Church to this day? while in the world, billions are perishing as they received not the love of the truth (because they simply cannot perceive beyond one mode, or get confused beyond one mode, and therefore can no longer see God in creation anymore?). Something the apostles said was obvious? what has happened to us? Has our knowledge really increased? Scientifically we are outstanding in extrapolating in one mode, but beyond it we are insane. And therefore spiritually insane, as the Bible, that is the Word of God, is not in one dominant linear mode! And for this reason as well I am sure.
Therefore, could it not be everything that treats of what is beyond the level of the senses that we have cunningly molded to create latter day religious dogma, is wrong? Because by reaching our conclusions (and I had done this also,) from trusting in our wisdom received at the level of our senses, which is indicative of the spirit of this last age and much of what is to be brought down. We, in the last days of all days exposed something profound about ourselves that was and has been noticed. Not least in the fact, that not only is Egypt the spirit of this last age. And the extrapolation and wisdom of precidented material causes claimed to be the answer for everything. But in the fact that our latter day theories were in collussion with this spirit (by principles applied to the Word) and thus (conclusions reached or perceived in the Word) that were so self assured and yet so completely wrong (on everything that treats of the spiritual). Like us, giving little or no thought that we had got it right (in these last carnal days of all days), and everyone else for the last 2000 years had got it wrong. Which is precisely what this involves. And I was guilty of this. I never even gave it any thought. Yet what was this exposing about me? And what was this telling those who were watching about the spirit of this last age. Knowing that we were so self assured, (whilst coming up with such theories in these last days of all days). And in the way we came up with them, (by reducing into one mode and giving the impression only one mode applies) as sceince does. Will we be congratulated for all of this? Is this not just what is said about the spirit of Egypt (that is the sceince of natural man) when applied to the Word? “Because the heart of PHARAOAH is lifted up in his height, and he hath shot up his top among the thick boughs, strangers shall cut him off and cast him forth in the day when he went down to the grave, I covered the deep over him. Thou shalt lie in the midst of the uncircumcised.” (Ezek. Xxxi 10-18). “The foundations of EGYPT shall be overthrown; the pride of his strength shall come down” (xxx). “How say ye unto PHARAOH, I am the son of the wise, the son of ancient kings, where are thy wise men? Let them tell thee now; the princess of Zoan are become fools, they have seduced EGYPT the stay of the tribes thereof; there shall be unto EGYPT no work that may make head nor tail.” (Isa. xix. 11-15). Because the Egyptians were of this character they were deprived of all the spiritual knowledge of the church. Their devestations are described by many miracles performed there, which are plagues, and signified by so many lusts of natural man separate from the spiritual, which then acts entirely from self-derived intelligence and the pride of it. And while the sciences of the natural man are called the desirable things of Egypt (Ezek. Xxvii. 7). In the oppossite sense Egypt signifies the natural man seperated from the spiritual and thus the pride of mans own intelligence (often unperceived and always confounded when applied to the Word), and thence insanity in spiritual things.

So we do not perceive what we are doing when we give the overwhelming impression that only one mode applies is what science does. As millions who would have otherwise believed and been saved cannot see God is creation anymore for this very reason. And when this finally dawns on us it should terrify us. And if I can perceive this is so. And I used to be one of them. Then of course, so can our God. We must not apply the pricniples of Egypt, when we leave these principles behind and stop giving others (for the sake of religious dogma more easily achieved) the overwhelming impression that only one mode applies, then we can stop “trusting in Egypt” in everyway. God made us and He knows we are not so simple minded as to not be able to perceive in both modes, and respond and act accordingly in both modes.

May the latter day carnal churches wake up.

[Tsmith]

06-28-2003 @ 02:32 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=134703#post134703)
John Reece:



Tsmith,

I just happened to notice David's use of ADONI in Psalm 62:13 (Hebrew text, verse 12 in English versions). To whom was David speaking?

You might want to do some further research into this verse. It actually read YHWH.

-Tony

[John Reece]

Today @ 04:11 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135686#post135686)
Tsmith:

You might want to do some further research into this verse. It actually read YHWH.

-Tony

Tony,

What more research can one do than to read it in the Hebrew text (which is what I am doing)? David alternately addresses God as "God", "YHWH", and "ADONI".

I just read Psalm 86 in Hebrew, and David again does the same thing therein, more than once.

See my quote of Psalm 86 in "John's XSD Thread" in the Biblical Languages 301 Forum. You will see that there are occurrences of "God", "LORD" (YHWH). and "Lord" (ADONI - I have indicated these occurrences in bold print just for your convenience).

Check it out and get back to me.

Blessings,

John

[Tsmith]

Today @ 12:37 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135834#post135834)
John Reece:



Tony,

What more research can one do than to read it in the Hebrew text (which is what I am doing)? David alternately addresses God as "God", "YHWH", and "ADONI".

I just read Psalm 86 in Hebrew, and David again does the same thing therein, more than once.

See my quote of Psalm 86 in "John's XSD Thread" in the Biblical Languages 301 Forum. You will see that there are occurrences of "God", "LORD" (YHWH). and "Lord" (ADONI - I have indicated these occurrences in bold print just for your convenience).

Check it out and get back to me.

Blessings,

John

Check the historical information available on scribal modifications to that verse. As I said, it read YHWH.

-Tony

[John Reece]

Today @ 06:29 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=136000#post136000)
Tsmith:

Check the historical information available on scribal modifications to that verse. As I said, it read YHWH.

-Tony

Did you look at Psalm 86 in my XSD thread in the Biblical Languages 301 Forum?

You are giving me an impression that you actually are dependent on secondary sources that support an idiosyncratic interpretation, and that you are not willing or able to look beyond that which appears to confirm your presuppositions.

John

[markporter]

has anyone mentioned Zechariah 14:9? "The LORD will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one LORD, and his name the only name."