posted 08-17-1999 04:48 PM            

I'm glad that you accept Genesis-Revelation as scripture. However, I'm not so certain that they hold this vague image of the original. For instance, we have translations of the original into Syriac. From what I have seen, it reads very much the same way. We do know that the name has been removed. However, we can gain this understanding by simply reading the hundreds of scriptures that indicate how important His name is.

Torah:

I understand your reasoning behind your lack of trust in the NT scripture. We surely are living in the great apostasy. However, we can understand by reading the very NT itself that it really does not contradict the Tanakh/OT. If it really did, there would be no light in it. But if you really take the time and study it as scripture, you will find the 'supposed' discrepencies to disappear just as quickly as the 'supposed' discrepencies within the Tanakh. There are challenges for sure to anyone's set of beliefs or faith. If we cannot trust scripture at all, then all are left to believe what they wish without any authority to guide them except what they 'think' Yahweh says to them in their own mind. I have no desire to ban you from the forum, but I would admonish you to adhere to the guidelines that you agreed to when signing up to this forum. When we have a question about a scripture, let's ask it in the light of "What am I not understanding?" rather than "This must have been tampered with because ..." The latter requires little laboring in the word. The former requires one to seek out the truth. I am sure Yahweh would want us to do the former.

All:

Isaiah 53 is certainly talking about Yahshua the Messiah. Many books in the NT quote it as such. Among these are Matthew 8:17, Mark 15:28, Luke 22:37 (a direct quote from Yahshua), John 12:38, and Acts 8:32-33. If you don't believe that Isaiah 53 is talking about Yahshua, you would have to throw out nearly every book in the NT. Nevertheless, let's look at the scriptures in question:

Quoting from Moses:

Go back to Isaiah 53:8 which reads: "Forcibly, after sentence, he was taken." Show me NT scripture that says that Iesous was forcibly taken!!! The NT says that he went willingly.

For one who knows the future, both are possible. Yahshua knew what would be done to Him, therefore He did it willingly. What was done to Him was He was betrayed and led away with men bearing swords and clubs. So did He just walk into the Sanhedrin and ask to be convicted? No, He was taken there. After sentence, He was taken to the hill to be hanged on a tree.

What kind of a loving father would be pleased to bruise his only begotten son? Or as my bible says:

Isaiah 53:10 (NJB) It was Yahweh’s GOOD PLEASURE to crush him with pain: If he gives
his life as a sin offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his life, and through him Yahweh’s good pleasure will be done.

What kind of loving Father? Our Heavenly Father who loved us enough for this to be His perfect will. If it were not so, we would have no salvation. I for one am very glad Yahweh loves us this much. I am also glad that Yahshua loves us and loves His Father enough to have done this. For Yahshua who had the hope of the resurrection unto life, the rewards were beyond our comprehension.

Matt 28:18 And Yahshua came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.

We too must be willing to give our lives for Yahweh. Greater love has no man than this.

When did Iesous have offspring and if he had them, when did he see them? When was his life prolonged? I guess the only way Yahweh’s good pleasure is served is when he gets to crush him with pain.

Especially if one believes it is wrong to call Him "Iesous" then they are sinning by calling him that. I certainly believe it is wrong.

When was His life prolonged? His life was prolonged when He rose again on the third day.

Reve 1:18 "I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.

Isaiah 53:12: Hence I shall give him a portion with the many, and he will share the
booty with the mighty.

Since when does Iesous have to share with the many mighty?

Yahshua doesn't have to share. But He does, of course. Another Messianic scripture speaks concerning Yahshua:

Psal 2:8 Ask of Me, and I will give You the nations for Your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Your possession.

We too shall share in this inheritance. For the meek shall inherit the earth and we will reign with Yahshua:

Reve 20:6 (NKJV) Blessed and holy [is] he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of Elohim and of the Messiah, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.

2Tim 2:11 (NKJV) This is a faithful saying: For if we died with Him, We shall also live with Him. 12 If we endure, We shall also reign with Him. If we deny Him, He also will deny us.

Even as Yahshua said:

Luke 11:21 (NKJV) "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace. 22 "But when a stronger than he comes upon him and overcomes him, he takes from him all his armor in which he trusted, and divides his spoils. 23 "He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.

Let's gather with Him!

------------------
With love in His service,

EliYah

posted 08-17-1999 06:46 PM            

quote:

---

...we can understand by reading the very NT itself that it really does not contradict the Tanakh/OT.

---

Before I began studying the Bible on my own I believed in the NT completely. It was after I began studying the NT on my own, and not blindly accepting what everyone else had to say about it, that I began to see it differently. At first I did not want to trust what I was seeing, but after seeing so much I had to admit that what I saw was real no matter how much it hurt, and I stand by what I have already said about the NT. I have spent many hours agonizing and praying over this very difficult matter.

That does not mean that I do not believe in the Anointed One of YHUH because I most certainly do.

You also wrote

quote:

---

When we have a question about a scripture, let's ask it in the light of "What am I not understanding?" rather than "This must have been tampered with because ..."

---

I have asked a number of questions since I began posting. Some where responded to and some received no response at all. Actually debating seems to be the most popular thing here.

In each case where I have posted something that may have been considered controversial, never have I tried to force anything on anyone. It has always been posted as information only. As to the NT, yes, I have very strong feelings in regard to it, but there again, I have never forced anything on anyone.

And again you said

quote:

---

When we have a question about a scripture, let's ask it in the light of "What am I not understanding?" rather than "This must have been tampered with because ..." The latter requires little laboring in the word. The former requires one to seek out the truth.

---

I feel just the opposite. When I realized that the NT was not the "infallible breathed word" as most would have us to believe, that is when I really began to SEEK THE TRUTH.

I hope you understand what it is that I am trying to express and that I have not just alienated myself more than I already have, because I truly look forward each day to reading the posts and also to posting.

Torah

posted 08-17-1999 10:33 PM            

I enjoyed reading it. The truth has a unique feeling that is pleasurable to the soul. It seems we will be beating a dead horse until Iaue (Yahweh) Elohim comes back. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink."

Yes, I agree that it is clearly wrong and a major breach of the Covenant (sin) to use Satanic names of blasphemy, making it seem as if those false elohim were equal to Iaue. The Covenant is very clear in its demands to "put a difference" between truth and lies, good and evil. Iaue has NO equal. He said He has checked around and He knows of not one. (Granted, there surely is no shortage of those claiming to be the Messiah or the Most High.)

So let us continue our quest for truth and spiritual freedom. Let us march on in the warfare against the Kingdom of Darkness, and may Iaue give us the strength to gain victory in the end. Let us continue to help each other in our struggles for that victory. May truth, and the few that make it, reign in the end...

------------------
Shalom to all and may IAUE's people fear His name and glorify it...

posted 08-18-1999 05:32 AM            

You wrote:
>>I'm not so certain that they hold this vague image of the original.<<

Please tell me what they hold if not a vague image of the original? We are told in 1Corinthians 13 that we see through a glass dimly.

You wrote:
>>For instance, we have translations of the original into Syriac. From what I have seen, it reads very much the same way. We do know that the name has been removed.<<

I’m sorry to be so disagreeable, but this doesn’t prove a thing in my understanding. I believe that all translations (not merely the English) are corrupt. I believe that it is only the Hebrew that remains intact. To this day, whenever a new text is found by archeologist, they are translated according to already established Theology.

You wrote:
>>we can gain this understanding by simply reading the hundreds of scriptures that indicate how important His name is.<<

I think you are missing my point all together. If the scriptures are tainted then these scriptures you think indicate the importance of His name are merely a shadow of the real thing, which tells us that his name is ineffable.

You wrote to Torah:
>>we can understand by reading the very NT itself that it really does not contradict the Tanakh/OT.<<

Not only does it contradict the OT, it also contradicts itself, but that is ONLY in the translations, NOT in the Hebrew and Greek texts.

>>If it really did, there would be no light in it.<<

Aren’t we told in these very scriptures themselves that we see through a glass dimly?

You wrote:
>>But if you really take the time and study it as scripture, you will find the 'supposed' discrepencies to disappear just as quickly as the 'supposed' discrepencies within the Tanakh.<<

The discrepancies are there and I agree that any good "THEOLOGIAN" can explain them away.

You wrote:
>>If we cannot trust scripture at all, then all are left to believe what they wish without any authority to guide them except what they 'think' Yahweh says to them in their own mind.<<

First of all, it isn’t the scriptures that we can’t trust, its mans translation and interpretation of them that is faulty. Secondly, we are all given the free will or choice to believe what ever we wish no matter what scriptures we are given. All mankind will believe whatever he or she "THINKS" is accurate.

You wrote:
>>Isaiah 53 is certainly talking about Yahshua the Messiah. Many books in the NT quote it as such. Among these are Matthew 8:17, Mark 15:28, Luke 22:37 (a direct quote from Yahshua), John 12:38, and Acts 8:32-33. <<

As far as Matthew 8:17 is concerned, in the Greek, it doesn’t say "This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah." Here is how it literally translates:
Matthew 8
16. late now become bring to self be tormented much and expel the breath to arrange in order and all (supreme, full, greatest) the badly have cure
17. how completely the tell through Isaiah the prophet gather and lay in order self the impotence (disease) I (we) take and the sickness take up
18. and approach one expert tell self teacher go along your in what whenever depart

Mark 15:28 doesn’t exist in the Greek.

Literally:
Luke 22:37
36. tell then self however now the have money bag take up likewise and knapsack and the not have be sold the garment self and purchase a sword
37. gather and lay in order because you that this the write to bind (is necessary) bring to an end within me the and in the midst of lawless take into account and because the around me an achievement have
38. the now tell lord pay attention the sword here two the now tell self reach (enough) to be

John 12
38. that the arrange in order Isaiah the prophet be filled with which tell Lord (Kurie) who believe the hearing me and the arm Lord (Kuriou) which reveal (uncover):

Acts 8
32. the now a portion the writing which read to be this so sheep on slaughter bring and so lamb before the shear self silent so not open (give entrance) the mouth self

You wrote:
>>If you don't believe that Isaiah 53 is talking about Yahshua, you would have to throw out nearly every book in the NT.<<

That’s only according to the translations we have in hand.

You wrote:
>>Go back to Isaiah 53:8 which reads: "Forcibly, after sentence, he was taken." Show me NT scripture that says that Iesous was forcibly taken!!! The NT says that he went willingly.
>>For one who knows the future, both are possible. Yahshua knew what would be done to Him, therefore He did it willingly.<<

If he goes against something just because he knew the future, that makes null and void the prediction which didn’t come true. In other scriptures he said that it HAD to happen in such and such a way so that the prophets could be fulfilled, so why did he go against the writings in this instance? Which brings me to another point. If prophecy speaks about something the person doesn’t have to know about the prophecy for it to come to pass, but it looks like Yahushua lived his life to "conform" to what was written by the prophets.

You wrote:
>>What was done to Him was He was betrayed and led away with men bearing swords and clubs. So did He just walk into the Sanhedrin and ask to be convicted? No, He was taken there. After sentence, He was taken to the hill to be hanged on a tree.<<

Show me one scripture in the NT that says that he put up a fight and didn’t go willingly!!!

You wrote:
>>What kind of loving Father? Our Heavenly Father who loved us enough for this to be His perfect will.<<

Why would a loving father who has all power, chose to take delight in the suffering of his only begotten son, for any purpose????? HE WOULDN’T

You wrote:
>>If it were not so, we would have no salvation.<<

Again, I must apologize for being so contrary, but if Yahweh can do all things, this is not true. He could have provided another way. I shall hold to what I see clearly and that is that the Yahweh who did these things was Yahweh the wife and not our loving heavenly Father.

You wrote:
>>I for one am very glad Yahweh loves us this much.<<

If this is the kind of heavenly father you desire, then you need to sleep with one eye open and in fear that he may in the future take delight in seeing all of us suffer. I praise the "Divine Absolute" that he had nothing to do with all this pettiness and is still sitting on his throne leading the universe from upon high. I think him that Yahweh/Sophia sacrificed her son and put an end to the useless bloodletting of innocent animals.

I asked:
>>When did Iesous have offspring and if he had them, when did he see them? When was his life prolonged? I guess the only way Yahweh’s good pleasure is served is when he gets to crush him with pain.<<
>>You replied:
Especially if one believes it is wrong to call Him "Iesous" then they are sinning by calling him that. I certainly believe it is wrong.
When was His life prolonged? His life was prolonged when He rose again on the third day.<<

You didn’t answer my question. When did Yahshua (if you prefer) have offspring? His life was ended and then he was resurrected like all who believe shall be. His life was not prolonged, he died on the cross. Death, burial, resurrection: his life ended, he was buried, then he was brought back to life.
I am not sure about the name being Yahushua. What proof do we have that it was anything other than what is written in the Greek text? The only thing I know of was that in the 1611 translation of the KJV bible, the name of Joshua/Yahushua son of Nun was also translated as Iesous, which may have been a typing error. I hope someone will provide more on this for me.
In one breath you are saying that we have to believe our scriptures and then in the other you say that we are not only to disbelieve the translations but the Greek as well.

You wrote:
>>Isaiah 53:12: Hence I shall give him a portion with the many, and he will share the
booty with the mighty. Since when does Iesous have to share with the many mighty?
Yahshua doesn't have to share. But He does, of course. Another Messianic scripture speaks concerning Yahshua:<<

There is a difference in "being given a portion" and "giving a portion". Yahushua was given all things, according to our bibles. This verse says that he was "given" a portion with many. Not only that, but he shared in the "booty".

I’m sorry and I do mean sorry that I seem to always be a odds with everyone and the I see things in such a different light. It hasn’t been fun and it is a lonely road to travel. I guess when you ask for truth, you had better be ready to hear it. I don’t take any of this lightly and had someone else told me these things a year ago, I would have reacted in much the same way as many here are reacting to me. So I understand totally all the sarcasm, I have been receiving. I don’t like it but will learn to rise above it.
Please believe me when I say that my only desire in life is to know and be in the total will of the "Divine Absolute", heavenly father of all things.

Shalom, Moses