Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

John 1:4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men.

TYNDALE BIBLE (1525)
In it was lyfe; and the lyfe was the lyght of men.

GREAT BIBLE (1539)
In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men,

GENEVA BIBLE (1560)
In it was lif; and the lif was the light of men.

BISHOP'S BIBLE (1568)
In it was life; and the life was the light of men.

RHEIMS BIBLE (1582)
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

KING JAMES BIBLE (1611)
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

But a long time ago, we were taught:
"[b]Thy logos (Word) is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."[Psalm. 119:105]

And Peter understood exactly that way:
"[u]We have also a more sure logos (word) of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:"[II. Pet 1:19]

I have more authority for saying the logos (word) is the light than any scholar has for saying the logos (word) is Jesus. If being the light of the world makes Jesus the logos [John. 9:5], then we are the logos, for we are the light of the world.[Mat. 5:14-16]

John 9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.

Mat 5:14-16
Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

What say ye?

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

John 1:1-5 (Halleluyah Scriptures)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Elohim, and the Word was Elohim.
2 He was in the beginning with Elohim.
3 All came to be through Him, and without Him not even one came to be that came to be.
4 In Him was Hai, and the Hai was the Light of men.
5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

I have contemplated these verses and have asked the Ruah haQodesh for guidance in interpreting its meaning. This is what was revealed to me…

1 In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with Elohim, and the Son was Elohim.
2 He was in the beginning with Elohim.
3 All came to be through the Son and without the Son not even one came to be that came to be.
4 In Him was Yahushua, and Yahushua was the Light of men.
5 And Yahushua’s light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome Him.

Therefore this also provides a rebuttal of your assertion denying the pre-existence of Yahushua.

Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

"'uios" is not "logos." No scripture ever said "In the beginning was the son." And no scripture ever said Jesus is the word. In fact, scripture says the logos can be corrupted; Jesus cannot be corrupted.

Furthermore, The logos was God; Jesus was the image of God. They do not even bear the same relation to the Father.



You cannot just arbitrarily substitute doctrine for scripture in a translation. No wonder you come up with that kind of translation. You must at least have the same Greek word for consideration to translate a substitute English word.

'o 'uios" (The son) is not in the Greek of that reference material.



The Hebrew is not found in the Greek translation of logos. Again, you are simply substituting your own doctrine for scripture through a translation that is false.



"Yahushua" is not remotely connected to this material.



Wishful thinking is not rebuttal. Try real interpretation of proper translation, and repost. I will consider anything that is legitimate, but your post definitely is not. You simply substitute what you think it refers to, with no effort whatsoever to verify it. A simple word study with any bible research will show that "Yahushua" is referenced no place in this reference material.

WhatIt'sWorth Loc: Methane Sea, Jupiter

"Just in case you hadn't heard -

in the beginning was the Word.
And the word was with God -
and the word WAS God."

Yer ate up, Theo.

Throw us out some MO o' that Jehovah's Witness mishmash!!



I CAIN'T WAIT !!

Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

Now fine a verse that says "And the logos "IS" God!
Good luck with that one. The difference is, when the logos changed to become flesh (Not God) God did not change.



I know of no JW's who teach this. Do you?

According to scripture, a "Witness" had to be a participant in the things witnessed; like Mathias in Acts 1 -21-26
"Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, 25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. 26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.





What are you going to do instead?

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

I respectfully disagree. I mentioned that I had contemplated these verses and asked the Ruah haQodesh for guidance in interpreting its meaning. What I posted was revealed to me…I listen to the Word of Elohim and not to the doctrines of man so I stand by what I posted.

1 John 2:20; 26-27 (Halleluyah Scriptures)
And you have an anointing from the Qadosh One and you know all…I have written this to you concerning those who lead you astray. But the anointing which you have received from Him stays in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as the same anointing teaches you concerning all, and is true, and is no falsehood, and even as it has taught you, you stay in Him.

1 John 2:20; 26-27 (New Living Translation)
But you are not like that, for the Holy One has given you his Spirit, and all of you know the truth…I am writing these things to warn you about those who want to lead you astray. But you have received the Holy Spirit, and he lives within you, so you don’t need anyone to teach you what is true. For the Spirit teaches you everything you need to know, and what he teaches is true—it is not a lie. So just as he has taught you, remain in fellowship with Christ.

WhatIt'sWorth Loc: Methane Sea, Jupiter

mwdegutis

I think your post in another thread is possibly the finest one-post exposition of dispensational pre-trib I have ever seen on any message board

I know that doctrine well -- you have presented it well - though I have considered other options besides that point

Jesus told the woman at the well that the hour was coming when people would not seek a physical mountain to base their worship on

I believe Him

NumenEyes

[quote=Theo]John 1:4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men.

TYNDALE BIBLE (1525)
In it was lyfe; and the lyfe was the lyght of men.

GREAT BIBLE (1539)
In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men,

GENEVA BIBLE (1560)
In it was lif; and the lif was the light of men.

BISHOP'S BIBLE (1568)
In it was life; and the life was the light of men.

RHEIMS BIBLE (1582)
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

KING JAMES BIBLE (1611)
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

But a long time ago, we were taught:
"[b]Thy logos (Word) is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."[Psalm. 119:105]

And Peter understood exactly that way:
"[u]We have also a more sure logos (word) of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:"[II. Pet 1:19]

I have more authority for saying the logos (word) is the light than any scholar has for saying the logos (word) is Jesus. If being the light of the world makes Jesus the logos [John. 9:5], then we are the logos, for we are the light of the world.[Mat. 5:14-16]

John 9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.

Mat 5:14-16
Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

What say ye?[/quote]

"As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world." (Jn9:5) Is this saying that once he is not in the world, meaning dead, his light is gone? If Jesus said to us that we are the light of the world, is it the same thing? That verse is confusing to me.

Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

That is a phony argument, and without merit. Anyone can claim to be inspired, but the result is what determines that issue. And replacing the Greek with Hebrew references is not inspiration, or the New Testament would have been originally written in Hebrew.

But the Hebrew scriptures were written to bring the Jews to Christ, and the Septuagint Greek was for the Gentile nations, when the "fulness of time" era began.

Whenever you post the Hebrew new testament to me, I will simply ignore your argument and delete the offensive part from my response. It has no merit in the discussion, because I am not a Hebrew, and am led by the doctrines and issues found within the Greek New Testament.

The Greek New Testament cannot be "Corrected" by a translation that uses Hebrew words and phrases by which you establish your understanding.

If you wish to discuss the reasoning behind this, I will discuss it with you, but will not argue from the Greek, against a position offered from the Hebrew. It is a useless waste of time.

Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

No! Jesus is still "in the kosmos" when "Christ lives in you." He remains the light as long as that takes place, but so also are those in whom Christ lives.

This is reflected in John 1:14 when John points out "The logos became flesh" and "We beheld the glory [b]as of an only begotten of the father." This is also a reflection of "Christ liveth in me" - "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."[Gal 2:20]



In 48 a.d. Paul wrote:
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." [Gal 2:20]

And -

"My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you," [Gal 4:19]

So Paul introduces a concept to the saints, of "Christ living in you;" but does not make any further defining remarks to the saints in Galatia. Then, in In 55 a.d. paul, writing to the saints in Corinth, said this -"Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?" [II Cor 13:5]

Paul begins to introduce some finer points of definition when in 60 a.d. he said he had "fully preached the Logos Of God" to the whole world, and explained what it is - "If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;"

"Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil The Logos Of God ; 26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you , the hope of glory:" [Col 1:23,25-27]

In 61 a.d. Luke recorded the following - "As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. 3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. 4 So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus. 5 And when they were at Salamis, they preached The Logos Of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister." [Acts 13:2-5]

"But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that The Logos Of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people." [Acts 17:13]

So, let's see if this theme is picked up for verification anywhere else in scripture.

In 69 a.d., we find a reference to "The logos of God;" but it seems to be in a far different theme or context; it is found in one of the writings of John, in a book called "apokolypse of John" more popularly referenced as "The Revelation of John."

In this book, John speaks to us of a "new name" that Jesus is going to write upon his saints; "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name." [Rev 3:12]

The use of the Greek word "kainon" (translated new) tells us this is not a name that has been around since creation and before; nor has it previously been applied to Jesus, or to anyone else as a name; though it has been defined by Paul, at this time,(69 a.d.) for over thirty-three years.

Then John tells us again "His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called "The Logos Of God."[Rev 19:12-13]

Paul expresses his exposition of a theme with - "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. 7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ." [Gal 4:4-7]

Finally, another Apostle picks up on the theme introduced and defined by Paul's writings. It is John's turn to talk about the saints in whom the spirit of Christ has been sent by God to dwell in the saints; (that "Logos Of God" which was introduced by Paul - "Christ living in me)" - John speaks of it this way: "He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the logos was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his (the one who received Christ) glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." [John 1:11-14]

John does not say "as many as received him, them he made sons of God." No, John says "as many as received him, to them gave he power to become (no article in the Greek) sons of God." John is telling us there is something required beyond believing, to qualify one for being a son of God. And that requirement has been being spelled out by Paul the Apostle since Jesus ascended to the right hand of the Father, so many years ago.

Why does John fail to say "We beheld the glory of the only begotten son?" Instead, he says "We beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten son."

`os' is what is called a "particle of comparison." Why would John be comparing the glory of Jesus to the glory of Jesus? The truth is, he is not. He is comparing The glory of the saint in whom the logos of God is personified, with the glory of the only begotten son of God dwelling in that saint.

Jesus did not "become a man" in John 1:14. The only reason there is even a mention of Jesus at all in John's first chapter, is because in 96 a.d., John tied his gospel to the person of Christ and to "the logos of God" referenced in Rev 3:12 and in 19:12-13 with reference to the new name he is to be given, as "The Logos Of God."

Jesus was not "the logos of God" in 30 a.d; He was not "The logos of God" in 33 a.d. when he was ascended, and he was not "the Logos of God" when John prophecied about his gift-name, as of 69 a.d. it was still a future event. "Christ living in you" is NOT the same as "Christ."

In 96 a.d. John is speaking in 1:14 about an event in the life of a saint, a personification, and recalling his remarks he wrote in 69 a.d, about Jesus, here ties the two events together.

But the personification of the logos of God takes place, according to Paul, everytime some saint or other, so lives his life that he can say "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." [Gal 2:20]

When this saint aknowledges "Christ Jesus" in his life, The Logos Of God is personified in the life of that saint. And "we behold the glory as of the only begotten son of God" all over again, in that saint, through Christ living in him.

Paul spent a lifetime convincing the saints about this subject of "Jesus Christ living in me" and said, "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you," [Gal 4:19]

So to recap what the Apostles have introduced and defined.
Paul introduced "Christ in you" as a personification; Paul defined "Christ in you" and said it is "the hope of Glory." He also defined it as "[u]The Logos Of God[/u[."

Then John picked up on a new name which is to be given Jesus, and that new name is "The Logos of God;" Finally John brings together, in his prologue, the saints in whom can be said "Christ lives in you," and "hope" and "glory" just as Paul had already introduced and defined. And John did not change a thing paul already said.

Jesus was born, at which time he received a name, "Jesus," which served to identify him while he grew in wisdom and in stature, and in favour with God and men, and when he was fully grown, and had died, had been resurrected, and had ascended by 33 a.d., received a name, "The logos of God" between the time when it was published in 69 a.d., and 96 a.d. when John ties the personification in the saints, to Jesus, who received the name; but it was not who and what he was; it was a name received. Jesus was never "the logos of God" but was given the name after he successfully completed his mission and was extolled and made very high [Isa 52:13], and given a name above every name.[Phil 2:9-11][Eph 1:19-23]

People have him already pre-existing as "the logos of God" and recognized as the personification of "the logos of God" at his birth when in fact, the terminology did not even exist until 69 a.d.

When I look at a saint in whom Christ lives, I see the logos of God personified, and "behold the glory as of glory of an only begotten son of God."

When John in his epistles [1st and 2nd John] speaks of "Jesus Christ came in flesh," he is not speaking of the birth of Jesus, he is speaking of "Christ living in me, in my flesh" spoken of by Paul - "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."[Gal 2:20]

There is no way you can find a place to separate Paul's life in the flesh after his conversion to Christ, from Jesus Christ living in Paul.

Furthermore, John himself said "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist."[II John 7]

John did not use the article, and neither should we if we are going to understand exactly what John is saying. He is not speaking of Jesus own body of his flesh, for then he would have said "Jesus came in the flesh," and everybody would be in agreement. But John did not say that , he said "Jesus Christ is come in flesh," which he did when he lived in Paul "in the flesh."

John does notuse use either the aorist tense or imperfect verbs, which would be necessary if he was speaking of the life of Jesus in his flesh; but John used a perfect active participle when he said - "... Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in flesh is of God:"

The significance of the "perfect active" is that Jesus has accomplished to the fullest, the fact of "com["-ing"] in flesh" as he lives in the lives of the saints. It is not a reference to his having been born "in the flesh."

This becomes significant when we consider Paul's words -"For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."[Rom 5:10]

The present participle in II Jn 7, which if you know anything about Greek participles, they are "-ing" words, and being present tense, means that in 85 - 90 a.d., John is saying Jesus is still com["-ing"] in flesh. Check it out with any Greek scholar you wish, if he knows what he is doing, and is honest, he will lay aside all doctrinal bias and admit the truth of this.

If you will look at how Paul introduces, defines, and explains "The logos of God" there is no way the expression, not even heard of till 69 a.d., could possibly have been introduced at the beginning of the church studies for new converts. It was not even written till near the end of the century. But the other books were, and they had a good understanding about what "The Logos Of God" entailed, as they strived to personify that of which Paul wrote and preached to all the world [Col 1:23-27].

And when John penned his gospel, he simply applied the simplicity of the gospel to the history of the first century church; - "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him {John The Baptist} might believe. 8 He {John The Baptist} was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light [The logos}.

The first four Englsih translations use the pronoun "it" when referencing the logos, because there is no previous use of it designating a person. The first translation to designate the use of Greek pronoun, read "it," not "He."

TYNDALE BIBLE (1525)
John 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God, and the worde was god.
2 The same was in the beginnynge with god.
3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothinge that was made.
4 In it was lyfe; and the lyfe was the lyght of men.
5 And the lyght shyneth in darknes; but the darknes comprehended it not.

GREAT BIBLE (1539)
1 In the begynnyng was the worde, and the worde was wyth God: and God was the worde. 2 The same was in the begynnyng wyth God. 3 All things were made by it, and wythout it, was made nothyng that was made. 4 In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyghte of men, 5 and the lyght shyneth in darcknes, and the darcknes comprehended it not.

GENEVA BIBLE (1560)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the worde, and the worde was with God, and that worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was lif; and the lif was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkenes; and the darkenes comprehended it not.

BISHOP'S BIBLE (1568)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was that word. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darknesse; and the darkeness comprehendeth it not.

RHEIMS BIBLE (1582)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word. 2 This was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was made nothing. That which was made 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darknesse; and the darkenesse did not comprehend it.

As you probably know, the Duoay-Rheims is the Catholic translation, and they were the developers of trinity doctrine. So by changing the meaning of translated pronouns, and switching around the inspired books, to be studied in a different chronology than that which the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit caused it to be published, they have changed the complete meaning of the word of God as it is presented to the church today.

John's first-century church history shows the difference if we do not leave out or skip the intervening verses -

John 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

John knew that both the logos and the man Jesus were designated as the light of the world, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, so while speaking of the one, he introduces the other -

John tells us Jesus was in the world, and the world did not know him for what he truly represented: "10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not."

John tells us of a matter that was not done in the time it took to write of it, but covered at least three to three and a half years - "11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not." Still not "Logos became flesh" It is not talking about the son of God "HU-incarnating." It is talking about the reaction of a disbelieving nation as it rejected the son of their own deity -12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: This was over a period of years, not just a whim of John's writing ability.

He tells us of their obedience to the preaching of John, who baptized them - 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

And finally, He tells us, by the Holy spirit's inspiration, of events that are to take place long after John the Baptist leaves the scene in death - 14 And the logos was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his [The saint in whom the logos of God was personified} glory, the glory as of an only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth.

John then picks up on the work of the mission of the son of God, as he committed himself to thoroughly demonstrating the "logos of God" to the people who listened to his preaching and witnessed his mission in action.

John goes on to tell the people of Jesus who came later than John himself, eliminating any such doctrine as the pre-existence of a spirit Jesus; 15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

"He was before me" is a reference to prophesy. Jesus was prophesied long before John, who was prophesied to be the forerunner of Messiah.

Between John and Paul, the real identity of "The Logos Of God" is told, but is hidden by the "Sunday school" design of Satan who joined the church and set himself as the arbiter of Sunday school and how it is to be taught. It was Satan who convinced the church leaders to begin teaching new converts beginning with "The life of Christ" followed by the history of the movement (The book of Acts of the Apostles) and by then the damage had been done. But the Holy Spirit did not publish the books in the order that way. And the truth of the gospel cannot be understood by taking the books out of the inspired order by which the Holy spirit published the gospel.

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

Jesus is not dead. He rose from the dead. So he still is the light of the world.
John 8:12 (New Living Translation)
Jesus spoke to the people once more and said, “I am the light of the world. If you follow me, you won’t have to walk in darkness, because you will have the light that leads to life.”

As for us being the light of the world…from the Sermon on the Mount:
Matthew 5:14-16 (New Living Translation)
“You are the light of the world—like a city on a hilltop that cannot be hidden. No one lights a lamp and then puts it under a basket. Instead, a lamp is placed on a stand, where it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your good deeds shine out for all to see, so that everyone will praise your heavenly Father.

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

Are you calling the Ruah haQodesh a liar?

Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

Why would I do that? I am telling you the Hebrew is not a replacement for the Greek new testament. I have a Hebrew new testament myself, but not for the purpose of correcting the Greek.

If you choose to follow the Hebrew, that is your business, but do not try to correct me in the Greek, from a Hebrew translation. And I call it a "translation" because it was not originally presented in the Hebrew, but the Hebrew New Testament is a recent invention, so it is immaterial to me if you want to use it.

I do know that scripture tells us that the reema is the Holy Spirit, and the logos was God. The logos changed to flesh, but the reema remains the Holy Spirit. So if you want to claim Holy Spirit inspiration, you must stick to the writing he provided.

The Hebrew New Testament is an invention of men, therefore is disqualified to serve as inspired scripture.

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

First, let me preface my reply by saying that I am not an expert on the original language of our Father’s qodesh Word, history, teachings, etc. But to learn it, I use The New Living Translation Bible and the Halleluyah Scriptures, a version that aims to be a literal translation of the Scriptures in English, primarily from the Massoretic Hebrew and Aramaic text of the Scriptures, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Aramaic Peshitta. The Ruah led me to these two texts.

As for what we’re discussing, I asked the Ruah to show me the meaning of John 1:1-5. It includes the question asked by you because it should be taken in context…“Who is ‘The word’ of John 1:1?” Again, the Ruah taught me John 1:1-5 means:

In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with Elohim, and the Son was Elohim.
He was in the beginning with Elohim.
All came to be through the Son and without the Son not even one came to be that came to be.
In Him was Yahushua, and Yahushua was the Light of men.
And Yahushua’s light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome Him.

So if you say, “That is a phony argument, and without merit. Anyone can claim to be inspired, but the result is what determines that issue. And replacing the Greek with Hebrew references is not inspiration, or the New Testament would have been originally written in Hebrew,” is that not calling the One who taught it to me, the Ruah haQodesh, a liar?

I am Ruah haQodesh indwelt. He lives within me so I don’t need anyone to teach me what is true. The Ruah teaches me everything I need to know, and what He teaches is true—it is not a lie.

Are you Ruah indwelt?

fiatlux

Sorry but nice Ivory Tower complete with impressive moat you constructed for your ideas. You alone know truth? Anyone who disagrees with you is spreading a false gospel? You got it direct from Spirit and me and the rest of the world of believers have a cheap copy? Really?