UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> For my Hebrew friends "iysh"

| Share | Email | Subscribe | Check IPs

9/9/10 10:49 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17911
 
can you give me a full definition for this word..."man".
9/9/10 2:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toelocku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/5/03
Posts: 3239
firstfruit i think...
9/9/10 2:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toelocku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/5/03
Posts: 3240
or first of the earth. from my mem so could be wrong.
9/9/10 6:42 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
martial_shadow
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 09/09/10 6:42 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9688
are you looking for Ish or for Adam as they can both mean man depending on the context.

edit: and happy 5771!
9/10/10 9:32 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17916
Interesting. The bible says that God is not an Iysh that he should lie...
9/10/10 3:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toelocku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/5/03
Posts: 3242
God "THE FATHER" is not a man He does not die He couldn't if He tried, He's so GREAT in power. His son Jesus, as are u and I are also sons of God(allhumanity). Jesus is our older brother/like a Father in that God created Him to create us.

Just like a physical Father wants His inheritance to go to His sons so 'our' Father wants for His. its really simple.
9/10/10 6:32 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
martial_shadow
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9691
Ish comes from the term Isha, the first term Adam uses to describe Eve (companion), She was then named Hava.

Ish would be a male companion though it is often used as 'a man'. Adam is also used as 'a man' but more fits 'mankind' or 'the ideal man'.

I'm still not sure where you guys are coming from.
9/10/10 7:24 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 300
"God "THE FATHER" is not a man He does not die He couldn't if He tried, He's so GREAT in power. His son Jesus, as are u and I are also sons of God(allhumanity). Jesus is our older brother/like a Father in that God created Him to create us."

This sounds very similar to what Jehovah's Witnesses believe. Question: To what or whom does "The Logos" refer to in the beginning of John?
9/10/10 9:10 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17923
inlikeflynn: Question: To what or whom does "The Logos" refer to in the beginning of John?

me: logos, quite literally means the mind, nature, character, plan...the greeks would use it sometimes to refer to the script of a play.

Jesus Christ is the mind, nature, moral character, redemptive plan, thoughts of God manifest in flesh.

The bible elsewhere speaks of Jesus being in "the bosom of the Father" (and no, that doesn't mean sitting on his lap or hand), and the "right hand of God".

Jesus is the mind, heart and power of the One Invisible God manifest in flesh.

9/10/10 11:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 303
the rooster - inlikeflynn: Question: To what or whom does "The Logos" refer to in the beginning of John?

me: logos, quite literally means the mind, nature, character, plan...the greeks would use it sometimes to refer to the script of a play.

Jesus Christ is the mind, nature, moral character, redemptive plan, thoughts of God manifest in flesh.

The bible elsewhere speaks of Jesus being in "the bosom of the Father" (and no, that doesn't mean sitting on his lap or hand), and the "right hand of God".

Jesus is the mind, heart and power of the One Invisible God manifest in flesh.



A couple of thoughts:

First, it seems that Toelocku is saying something different than you. He seems to be saying that Jesus was created by God, and is not part of the "one God". I don't want to speak for him but that's how I read it. I'll let him clarify.

Second, the wording in the beginning of John is kind of strange to me in light of your interpretation. It says "In the beginning, was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Why use this wording if it is just speaking of the mind, character, and will of God. Isn't that self evident? What else would it be? In other words, why say "the Word (logos) was with God? How else could it be?
9/11/10 3:19 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
59 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 19997
 When neo-Sabellians and Aryans get together...
9/11/10 4:59 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
103 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6279
toelocku - God "THE FATHER" is not a man He does not die He couldn't if He tried, He's so GREAT in power. His son Jesus, as are u and I are also sons of God(allhumanity). Jesus is our older brother/like a Father in that God created Him to create us.

Just like a physical Father wants His inheritance to go to His sons so 'our' Father wants for His. its really simple.

 or-- The Elect One of God, as Enoch called him.
9/11/10 1:26 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 304
Ridgeback -  When neo-Sabellians and Aryans get together...


The damn Germans got nothin' to do with it. (couldn't resist that Smokey and the Bandit quote)

Seriously, though, what is the tie in with Aryans? I assume you are talking about the pagan religion not the race.
9/11/10 3:34 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17924
inlikeflynn, what ridge meant to say was "arian" who was the founder/leader of a non orthodox Christological group or sect that believed Jesus was a subordinate created creature. Some equated him to an "angel of the Lord", sort of the first angel of the lord, almost a demi god. It was one of several competing Christological views battling to become the dominant belief or school concerning Jesus. There is some overlap with early gentile apologist who are now considered catholic or orthodox church "fathers". Certainly some of the language of both Tertullian and Justin Martyr contain similar language. (a subordinate, created logos).

Ridge could have added, "when neo sabellians, arians, and new tritheist get together ;-)"

inlikeflynnn: First, it seems that Toelocku is saying something different than you. He seems to be saying that Jesus was created by God, and is not part of the "one God". I don't want to speak for him but that's how I read it. I'll let him clarify.

Second, the wording in the beginning of John is kind of strange to me in light of your interpretation. It says "In the beginning, was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Why use this wording if it is just speaking of the mind, character, and will of God. Isn't that self evident? What else would it be? In other words, why say "the Word (logos) was with God? How else could it be?

me: to clearly indicate it was not separate from the One and Only True and Invisible God.

God's thoughts, mind, moral character, His plan were His alone, they were with Him only and His invisible moral nature and character '...were made flesh and we beheld His Glory...".

If I go to a job interview armed "...with my experience". It is not a 2nd person, or a little me walking around with a suit and briefcase and resume :-)

It simply is defining part of me that I'm highlighting as to illustrate my confidence.

Jesus came *with* the mind, power, moral nature, authority, character, plan, of the Holy and Living God, because He was the Heart and Mind of God manifest in the flesh (1Tim 3:16).

He is the True God in flesh.

Praise Jesus!
9/11/10 3:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17925
Justin Martyr (trinitarian church "father")

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Justin_Martyr

" describing his Christology, Justin sees the Logos as a separate being from God and subordinate to him: "For next to God, we worship and love the Logos who is out of the unbegotten and ineffable God, since also He became man for our sakes, that, becoming a partaker of our sufferings, He might also bring us healing" (Second Apology, 13). Though subordinate, the Logos was still a divine force that was active in human history:

There is, and that there is said to be, *ANOTHER* God and Lord *SUBJECT* to the Maker of all things who is also called *AN Angel*, because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things, above whom there is no other God, wishes to announce to them.... I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, *IS DISTINCT FROM HIM WHO MADE ALL TINGS I mean *NUMERICALLY*, not in will. (Dialogue with Trypho, 56).

Justin speaks of the divine Logos as "another God" beside the Father, qualified by the gloss: ‘other, I mean, in number, not in will’. Justin actually finds fault with the view of Hellenized Jews who held that the divine Logos is no more distinct from God than sunlight is from the sun and suggested, instead, that the Logos is more like a torch lit from another. He wanted to do justice to the independence of the Logos.

ME: blah, Justin Martyr, Tertullian and others were to influenced by pagan philosophy to retain a strict monotheistic view. These "fathers" infected their Christology with this polytheistic view of the godhead and this subordinate Christ.

Jesus was only subordinate while He fufilled His self imposed limitations as the Son of God. But we read in the end of Matthew, those limitations are cast off and He holds all authority and ALL POWER. He is King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

His office as sacrifical son was temporary.



9/13/10 1:14 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 305
the rooster - inlikeflynn, what ridge meant to say was "arian" who was the founder/leader of a non orthodox Christological group or sect that believed Jesus was a subordinate created creature. Some equated him to an "angel of the Lord", sort of the first angel of the lord, almost a demi god. It was one of several competing Christological views battling to become the dominant belief or school concerning Jesus. There is some overlap with early gentile apologist who are now considered catholic or orthodox church "fathers". Certainly some of the language of both Tertullian and Justin Martyr contain similar language. (a subordinate, created logos).

Ridge could have added, "when neo sabellians, arians, and new tritheist get together ;-)"

inlikeflynnn: First, it seems that Toelocku is saying something different than you. He seems to be saying that Jesus was created by God, and is not part of the "one God". I don't want to speak for him but that's how I read it. I'll let him clarify.

Second, the wording in the beginning of John is kind of strange to me in light of your interpretation. It says "In the beginning, was the Word (logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Why use this wording if it is just speaking of the mind, character, and will of God. Isn't that self evident? What else would it be? In other words, why say "the Word (logos) was with God? How else could it be?

me: to clearly indicate it was not separate from the One and Only True and Invisible God.

God's thoughts, mind, moral character, His plan were His alone, they were with Him only and His invisible moral nature and character '...were made flesh and we beheld His Glory...".

If I go to a job interview armed "...with my experience". It is not a 2nd person, or a little me walking around with a suit and briefcase and resume :-)

It simply is defining part of me that I'm highlighting as to illustrate my confidence.

Jesus came *with* the mind, power, moral nature, authority, character, plan, of the Holy and Living God, because He was the Heart and Mind of God manifest in the flesh (1Tim 3:16).

He is the True God in flesh.

Praise Jesus!


That really doesn't make a lot of sense. Again, it is unnecessary and redundant to say that God's "thoughts, plans, character, etc.." were with Him and were Him. It can't be any other way. I think it makes more sense to look at it like this:

"In the beginning there was the Word" - This establishes that Jesus is eternal, and not created.

"and the Word was with God and the Word was God" - These two phrases put together are important. If the writer was just trying to make the point that Jesus was God, why not just say "and the Word was God". By adding the phrase "the Word was with God" seems to indicate that there is some kind of distinction between the two. As to your experience example, you can say you have your experience "with" you, but you wouldn't say that your experience "was" you.
9/15/10 12:37 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17927
inlikeflynn: That really doesn't make a lot of sense. Again, it is unnecessary and redundant to say that God's "thoughts, plans, character, etc.." were with Him and were Him.

me: but that is what the word, literally means. It means exactly that. The "plan of God" that represented all that He is was with Him and *NO ONE* else and was Him...it was the mind and moral nature of the Invisible God and this "script" if you will, this Holy Plan, the very *mind* of God was made flesh.

you: It can't be any other way. I think it makes more sense to look at it like this:

"In the beginning there was the Word" - This establishes that Jesus is eternal, and not created.

me: Jesus is. But prior to being "made of a woman" He was Spirit. The Only Spirit. We sometimes use the title "God" or the Jews call Him Y-h.

And He was eternal and not created as to His Spirit.

Let me ask you a question. Are you and your word two different and distinct persons, or does your word simply announce and manifest your inner thoughts?

Man wants to know the mind of God and it's found solely in Christ.

you: "and the Word was with God and the Word was God" - These two phrases put together are important. If the writer was just trying to make the point that Jesus was God, why not just say "and the Word was God". By adding the phrase "the Word was with God" seems to indicate that there is some kind of distinction between the two.

me: and what per se would that distinction be? Do you see two eternal supernatural deities in heaven before the creation? And if so, how do you escape polytheism?

The distinction between God the Father and Jesus Christ is that God the Father is the title we use to refer to God as the invisible deity. Jesus Christ is the personal name of that God who stepped into time as man, with all man's weakenesses to redeem us.

Distinctions? Yes. Two different Deities? no, a thousand times no. "Hear o Israel, the Lord our God is 1 LORD!"

INLIKEFLYNN: As to your experience example, you can say you have your experience "with" you, but you wouldn't say that your experience "was" you.

ME: Is my experience someone elses? My experience represents a glimpse of who I am. The Logos is a glimpse of who te Invisible God is.

We cannot see the full glory of the invisible God and live, but we can see Him through Christ, who is "the expressed image of the Invisible God" and " ...*IN HIM* dwelleth all the fullness of the godhead bodily" (godhead means father, son and every other title to describe the godhead was represented and found in Christ).

Christ (the manifestation of God as man) was with God from before time (the lamb was slain from the foundation of the world) and it was His alone, no one elses.

Gen 1 says, "in the begining God..."

Before anything there was God, alone with His supreme plan (logos). It was with Him alone, and it was Him...that is it was divine in essence and above anything created.

9/15/10 12:50 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 308
>you: "and the Word was with God and the Word was God" - >These two phrases put together are important. If the >writer was just trying to make the point that Jesus was >God, why not just say "and the Word was God". By adding >the phrase "the Word was with God" seems to indicate that >there is some kind of distinction between the two.

>me: and what per se would that distinction be? Do you see >two eternal supernatural deities in heaven before the >creation? And if so, how do you escape polytheism?

>The distinction between God the Father and Jesus Christ is >that God the Father is the title we use to refer to God as >the invisible deity. Jesus Christ is the personal name of >that God who stepped into time as man, with all man's >weakenesses to redeem us.

>Distinctions? Yes. Two different Deities? no, a thousand >times no. "Hear o Israel, the Lord our God is 1 LORD!"

Fair enough. Can you clarify something for me? When God was here on earth, contained in the physical body of Jesus, was "Heaven" empty? In other words, was God's presence still there and was His spirit still omni-present on the earth?
9/15/10 3:44 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
RoninBT
5 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/9/05
Posts: 50
Just my 2 cents on the “Logos / Word” of Jhn 1:1:
I think John is referring to one particular word found in Gen 1:1. Look at Gen 1:1 as a menorah. Suspend your disbelief for a second and imagine that each of the 7 Hebrew words in Gen 1:1 represent one lamp on the menorah. The center lamp of the menorah is called the servant. Keep in mind, Christians claim Jesus is the suffering servant of Isaiah 53. The center or 4th word happens to be eth (alef-tav) the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The Greek equivalent would be.....Alpha & Omega.

I know this sounds crazy but if Yeshua / Jesus is the Messiah then there should be some evidence in the beginning:
Isa 40:21 Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?
Isa 41:26 Who has declared this from the beginning, that we might know? Or from former times, that we may say, "He is right!"? Surely there was no one who declared, Surely there was no one who proclaimed, Surely there was no one who heard your words.
Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';

Alpha & Omega; Alef & Tav; Beginning & End; First & Last:
Isa 41:4 "Who has performed and accomplished it, Calling forth the generations from the beginning? 'I, the LORD, am the first, and with the last. I am He.'"
Rev 1:8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."
Rev 21:6 Then He said to me, "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost.
Rev 22:13 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."
9/18/10 2:05 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17928
inlikeflynn: Fair enough. Can you clarify something for me? When God was here on earth, contained in the physical body of Jesus, was "Heaven" empty? In other words, was God's presence still there and was His spirit still omni-present on the earth?

me: yes. Like when His Presence "filled the temple" built by David or Solomon. God's Spirit cannot be contained. My visual is a cup (the body of Christ) in the middle of the ocean. The cup is full yet all around it is still the ocean. That's why Jesus told Nicodemus that He was in heaven even while He was standing there talking to Him.


| Share | Email | Subscribe | Check IPs

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.