Standing Up for the Gospel of the Christ
as it is Proclaimed in the Greek Text !
Empowering the Independent Communities of Yahowah and Yahoshua
Living By Both Covenants
|Educational Papers On "One God", Page 3:
|Yahowah IS 1: "One God" Means the Creator YHWH is a Singular Being, One Person having One Intellect, The only Elohim of Israel, The Father, who resurrected 'the Yahoshua', the promised Messiah.|
|• Upon This Rock - Seriously Conflicts with the Trinity|
Perhaps the bigger issue is that billions of people are actually standing on the wrong Rock.
The foundation Rock is not Peter.
The real Rock Cliff foundation is our believing that Yahoshua (Jesus) is the Christ (anointed, Messiah) "The Son of the Living God".
But this belief is not about Yahoshua having the titles.
Rather, it is the belief into the name (renown) of Yahoshua (Jesus), that He is a separate entity, the "Only Begotten (as in being sired) Son of God", now living in heaven with His Father!
John 20:17: "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God"
Please first read
Upon This Rock
Upon This Rock, Part2
|• What The Word For "God" Meant To People In Ancient Times|
|Historical documents demonstrate how the word 'Elohim/God' was used in ancient times.
Documents found in other languages, such as Latin, Egyptian, and Sumerian, as well as the Hebrew/Aramaic Text itself, all demonstrate that anyone (men) could be elevated to be an 'Elohim', elevated to be a God.
Although anyone could/can be an 'Elohim/God', there is only '1' YHWH (Yahowah), the only 'Elohim/God' of Israel.
Understanding that this debate IS NOT ABOUT the Hebrew word 'Elohim' is foundational.
|Ancient Usage Of
The Word 'Elohim/God'
|• Step by Step Grammatical Analysis of John 1:1-14|
The most often quoted verse to support the Trinity, actually says the opposite.
You need to read the historical record of how these versus were translated before AD 325.
You need to read the official Footnotes of the Trinitarian translators.
The facts are that the Greek Grammar, the translator's footnotes, and the historical records demonstrate that these verses are being purposefully mistranslated.
Seems no one wants to tell you that John 1 is directly written from Proverbs Chapter 8. Just read Chapter 8, and you will understand what John is talking about. John 1 has nothing to do with introducing entirely new scripture about a preexistent Jesus. Rather, John is reciting existing Text, and talking about "Wisdom":
"Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice? She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths. She crieth at the gates, at the . . . (22) The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by Him, as one brought up with Him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before Him; Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men. Now therefore hearken unto me, O ye children: for blessed are they that keep my ways." (Proverbs 8:1, 22-32).
The "Wisdom" that was with YHWH from the beginning, is the "Word" John was talking about.
History: [Quoting from Net Bible Footnote #3] "However, in contemporary English "the Word was divine" (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since "divine" as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation "what God was the Word was" is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by "what God was the Word was" would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation "the Word was fully God" was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which "became flesh and took up residence among us" in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, "the Word was with God," shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father."[end quote]
Notice that the translators know exactly what the Greek text says, "the word was divine". But notice that they do not like what the text says, because they want it to say something else to the reader, and so they force it to say only what they want it to say. The translators have intentionally deviated from the Greek Text "the word was divine" because they want the reader to think that "the Word" is the divine god-person "Jesus", and is made of the same essence as "The Father". They are intentionally wording it to convey the Trinitarian viewpoint. They are no longer translating the text with honesty, they are instead forcing you to believe their Trinitarian Catechism.
(PDF 14 Pages)
|• Step by Step Grammatical Analysis of Colossians 1:15-16:|
|Diving into the Greek Text demonstrates that these verses are translated to lead the reader into thinking what is not there.
It does not say that the Messiah created everything in Genesis 1.
It says that the Messiah passively received (was given by another) every power and authority from the Father.
|• Step by Step Grammatical Analysis of "The Christian Confession" of 1-John 4:2|
|Diving into the Greek Text demonstrates that these verses are translated in such a way as to hide the seriousness of The Confession.
The Biblical Confession given to expose the spirit of antichrist is far more exacting than what is expressed in the Catholic/Protestant Bibles!
Most people have been taught things which directly contradict the original Confession of Faith.
Who is the surviving entity of the resurrection? The Original Confession of Faith requires you to understand just WHO the surviving entity of the resurrection IS!
Is it the human being "Jesus/Yahoshua" who is now alive in heaven?
Or is it a preexistent God-Person "Christ" who is now back in heaven?
The 1-John Confession and Test makes the answer obvious, and the required answer is very serious!
It is the human being "Jesus/Yahoshua" who is now alive in heaven!
And more, this Confession requires you to understand what this fact means!
is a vital test!
Confession of Faith
of 1-John 4:2
|• Step by Step Grammatical Analysis of John 17:5|
Diving into the Greek Text demonstrates that this verse is seriously mistranslated.
This verse may be the most blatantly (done on purpose) mistranslated verses in the Bible!
This verse does not say that Jesus preexisted before the world (the creation) began.
It says that He was asking The Father to retain the same superior position-status which He already had with the Father, a status of glory before-in-position to that of the world.
"Therefore, at this time it is urgent that You glorify Me, You Father in Your presence, so that the glorified status which I having-had is superior to the superiority the worldly-order has in Your presence."
(PDF 4 Pages)
|• God's Titles: King of Kings and Lord of Lords|
|What about Revelation 19:11-16 and 1-Timothy 6:13-16.
Do these versus combine to tell us that 'the Messiah' and 'the YHWH' have the same titles, and therefore are the same Divine Being?
|• They Say: "God Had To Die":|
They say that no human, even if considered to be a perfect sacrifice, could ever die for more than themselves.
They say that the only way that Yahoshua's sacrifice could atone for all of mankind, is that Yahoshua's death had to be worth more than all of mankind.
Therefore, Yahoshua had to be God, or else His death would not be worth enough.
What they say sounds logical, but their premise about the Messiah's sacrifice having to be the death of God Himself is not in the Bible! The Bible tells us what YHWH says about the value of His only Son's sacrifice. "For since death is through man, also through a man is a resurrection of the dead" (1-Corinthians 15:21-22).
|God Did Not
Have To Die
|• They Say: "Thomas Called Jesus God":|
They say that in John 20:28 Thomas said "my Lord and my God".
They say this then shows that Jesus is also the Elohim/God of Israel, YHWH, too.
But did Thomas say "God" in Greek, or in Hebrew?
Knowing that Thomas said this in Hebrew makes this conclusion incorrect.
|Jesus Was Not
Called God (as in YHWH)
|• They Say: "God Is A Family of Divine Beings":|
They say that God is a Family of Divine Beings, having Members of God "The Father" and "Jesus Christ".
They say that the God of Israel, YHWH, came from the heavenly realm, down to earth to become a man, Jesus.
They say that Jesus came to reveal the previously unknown God, God "The Father".
They say that it was this unknown God, God "The Father", that raised Jesus from the dead.
But where is the Text that says anyone else but YHWH is God "The Father"?
And where is the Text that says anyone else but YHWH is a Divine Being, that we are to worship instead of Him?
|"They Say" God Is A Family
|Search for All Occurrences||Lexicon and Concordance||Greek Grammar Explanations|