• Welcome to White Horse Forums. We ask that you would please take a moment to introduce yourself in the New Members section. Tell us a bit about yourself and dive in!

Biblical proof that there is no angels

Leaving the field to our readers.

A word to them, from the hound of Jewish monotheism.

Genesis 1:1 is properly rendered in all translations of the Bible. This is easily confirmed by consulting any standard Hebrew Lexicon. My hope is that you will confirm it for yourselves. Laughing at it will lead you away from God to the gods, and that’s no laughing matter.
 
Looking for something else prompted me to return to this abandoned field.

“1. The Usage of the LXX. theos is the usual LXX equivalent for el and elohim …

5. The Content of the OT belief in God. The thesis that God is Israel’s God is fundamental. This God is God absolute (cf. 1 Kings 18:21), so that as the name merges into appellatives, the words el and elohim come to contain the vital heritage of faith. …

Elohim is clearly a numerical plural only in a very few instances (cf. Ex. 15:11). Even a single pagan god can be meant by the word (e.g., 1 Kgs. 11:5). In the main, then, we have a plural of majesty. There is no sense of treating God as one among many gods. The point is that God has all that belongs to deity.”

(Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged In One Volume, “El and Elohim in the OT”, pp. 324, 325)

“In the beginning God” … the God of Israel. Yahweh.

Gnosticism opposes the fundamental belief presented in scripture.

Gnosticism is refuted by the Old Testament. Gnosticism is refuted by the New Testament.

To be a Gnostic is to be an enemy of the God of Israel, Yahweh.

Want to be a Gnostic? No one is stopping you. Be prepared to face the wrath of Yahweh, if you do so choose.
 
Mattathias said:
“Elohim is plural in meaning!”

Almost never, in fact.
Click to expand...

Repetition is a sure sign of a weak argument. It doesn't matter how many times you say the same thing. The facts never change.

but but but...... yes, I know it's plural.... but it's singular in meaning!

Why though? Why does the text go on to say 'Let us.... in our image..... ----- well, those must be plural, but singular in meaning too!

Yeah. That must be it.
 
Mr E said:
Repetition is a sure sign of a weak argument. It doesn't matter how many times you say the same thing. The facts never change.

but but but...... yes, I know it's plural.... but it's singular in meaning!

Why though? Why does the text go on to say 'Let us.... in our image..... ----- well, those must be plural, but singular in meaning too!

Yeah. That must be it.
Click to expand...
in Genesis 5 he created them and called their name Adam

Male and female and called their name Adam?
 

The caller asked Dr. Brown (a man who converted from Judaism to trinitarianism) a question about Hebrew plural verbs. His answer should be heard by all and sundry.
 
Mattathias said:

The caller asked Dr. Brown (a man who converted from Judaism to trinitarianism) a question about Hebrew plural verbs. His answer should be heard by all and sundry.
Click to expand...
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
— John 1:17-18

How do you reconcile this scripture, seeing John has stated that no man had seen God at anytime?

John is also stating there is no grace or truth in the Mosaic law?
 
Waiting on Him said:
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
— John 1:17-18
Click to expand...

What, if anything, does that have to do with Dr. Brown’s point about Hebrew verb usage?

Waiting on Him said:
How do you reconcile this scripture, seeing John has stated that no man had seen God at anytime?
Click to expand...

Firstly. A whole lot of man saw Jesus. That should be enough to persuade us that the verse isn’t speaking about Jesus.

Secondly. From the context of the verse, Jesus is speaking about his God and Father, Yahweh. No man had seen Yahweh’s face at anytime. No man could see Yahweh’s face and live.

Thirdly. Moses saw Yahweh on Mt. Sinai; but only his back, not his face.

Waiting on Him said:
John is also stating there is no grace or truth in the Mosaic law?
Click to expand...

No. I’m pretty confident that you have read the Mosaic law. Do you not see any grace or truth in it? Does it sound reasonable to you that something God gave contained no grace and no truth? It doesn’t to me (that would be uncharacteristic of God) and it wouldn’t have to a Jew. We must always keep in mind that Jesus himself is a Jew.

That’s not something that would have found a place in John’s mind or the minds of his fellow Jews, including Jesus. Recall for a minute what Paul said about the Mosaic law.

What do you think John was saying then in this comment?
 
Mattathias said:
Thirdly. Moses saw Yahweh on Mt. Sinai; but only his back, not his face.
Click to expand...
And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
— Genesis 32:30


Is this a false statement?
Mattathias said:
No. I’m pretty confident that you have read the Mosaic law. Do you not see any grace or truth in it? Does it sound reasonable to you that something God gave contained no grace and no truth? It doesn’t to me (that would be uncharacteristic of God) and it wouldn’t have to a Jew. We must always keep in mind that Jesus himself is a Jew.
Click to expand...
I personally don’t believe this law was given by the God of Jesus. Don’t forget that Moses was an Egyptian.
Mattathias said:
Secondly. From the context of the verse, Jesus is speaking about his God and Father, Yahweh. No man had seen Yahweh’s face at anytime. No man could see Yahweh’s face and live.
Click to expand...
Are you saying you don’t believe Jesus saw Him, or that you don’t believe Jesus was a man?
 
Waiting on Him said:
And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
— Genesis 32:30


Is this a false statement?
Click to expand...

No. It’s not a false statement. “Face to face” is an idiom.

Who does scripture say the God of Jacob is? Yahweh.

Who does the Gnostic say Yahweh is? The devil.

Who do you say Yahweh is?

Waiting on Him said:
I personally don’t believe this law was given by the God of Jesus.
Click to expand...

Then you don’t believe that the law was given by Yahweh.

In scripture there are only two choices offered: Yahweh vs. idols.

Satan and the demons are behind idols.

If Yahweh didn’t give the law then Satan did.

If Satan gave the law, how do you account for the law being praised in the Hebrew Bible and by Jesus and the Apostles in the New Testament?

Waiting on Him said:
Don’t forget that Moses was an Egyptian.
Click to expand...

Don’t forget that Moses is an Israelite and a prophet of Yahweh. Moses left the house of Pharaoh.


Waiting on Him said:
Are you saying you don’t believe Jesus saw Him, or that you don’t believe Jesus was a man?
Click to expand...

Jesus is a human person. He saw Yahweh through spiritual eyes, not physical eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top