Turtullian, the one who first said Trinity said… The Official name of The Father is God and at the same time God is WHAT He Is. At the Same Time The name of The Son is Jesus. At the Same time God is WHAT He IS. To Know the Spirit of God is To Know God. The Son Revealed to us The Spirit of God through His Work on the Cross. God is Spirit. The Father and Son Poured out their Spirit upon us Through the Gospel. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter Preached The Gospel, for the 1st time and The Good News of God opened the eyes of 3000 to SEE The Spirit of God and be saved. Our eyes are opened to See the Mercy of God, the Grace of God, The Faithfulness and Love of God, yes the Goodness of God in the Cross of Christ. And The Spirit begans to Transform us.
The word "God" (Elohim) would have meant something different to a 1st century Jew than it does to people today. This is illustrated in the fact that in John 10:34 where Jesus quotes Psalm 82:6 telling the sanhedrin that they are "gods" (elohim). Just a few verses later in chapter 1 John tells us no man has seen God at any time. This is a Biblical Truth, no man has ever seen God (because God has no form or image), nor can man see God and live, yet there are people in the Tanakh who have claimed to see God "face to face" and lived. How is this? We could probably both agree that who the seen was "the Angel of the Lord", a preincarnate Jesus, but where we would differ is whether we believe Him to be the Literal God or not. God has those who represent Him, and in a sense are Him to those they interact with. This was the point Jesus was making when He told the sanhedrin that they are "elohim" (gods) to those they were representing God to. The Bible even tells us that Solomon sat on the Throne of Y,H,V,H. I could go on and on with examples, but with all this in mind, John was communicating that "the Word" was there in the beginning with "The God", and was standing in the "stead of/place of" The God as God/representative of God.
There is really no reason to assume Elohim means God. This word has been used to describe God and angels... and dead people... and iirc even living people (judges). It never has been clear. It's much safer to assume it would mean something more like a spiritual being in general, but nonetheless it's actual meaning has been lost in the history.
I think most of the formal translations are fine. KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB.....the normal formals. The message or the passion translation are examples of informal paraphrases. I would steer clear of those.
@@VelchinLab Thanks for responding, I own an ESV, do you think that'd be a good Bible for someone who wants to practice Orthodox Christianity? I've heard ESV was more geared towards Evangelists.
He sure is! ❤
YES! Thanks for asking
Turtullian, the one who first said Trinity said… The Official name of The Father is God and at the same time God is WHAT He Is.
At the Same Time
The name of The Son is Jesus. At the Same time God is WHAT He IS.
To Know the Spirit of God is To Know God. The Son Revealed to us The Spirit of God through His Work on the Cross.
God is Spirit. The Father and Son Poured out their Spirit upon us Through the Gospel.
On the Day of Pentecost, Peter Preached The Gospel, for the 1st time and The Good News of God opened the eyes of 3000 to SEE The Spirit of God and be saved.
Our eyes are opened to See the Mercy of God, the Grace of God, The Faithfulness and Love of God, yes the Goodness of God in the Cross of Christ. And The Spirit begans to Transform us.
The word "God" (Elohim) would have meant something different to a 1st century Jew than it does to people today. This is illustrated in the fact that in John 10:34 where Jesus quotes Psalm 82:6 telling the sanhedrin that they are "gods" (elohim). Just a few verses later in chapter 1 John tells us no man has seen God at any time. This is a Biblical Truth, no man has ever seen God (because God has no form or image), nor can man see God and live, yet there are people in the Tanakh who have claimed to see God "face to face" and lived. How is this? We could probably both agree that who the seen was "the Angel of the Lord", a preincarnate Jesus, but where we would differ is whether we believe Him to be the Literal God or not. God has those who represent Him, and in a sense are Him to those they interact with. This was the point Jesus was making when He told the sanhedrin that they are "elohim" (gods) to those they were representing God to. The Bible even tells us that Solomon sat on the Throne of Y,H,V,H. I could go on and on with examples, but with all this in mind, John was communicating that "the Word" was there in the beginning with "The God", and was standing in the "stead of/place of" The God as God/representative of God.
There is really no reason to assume Elohim means God. This word has been used to describe God and angels... and dead people... and iirc even living people (judges). It never has been clear. It's much safer to assume it would mean something more like a spiritual being in general, but nonetheless it's actual meaning has been lost in the history.
Nonsense
What Bible do you recommend is the most accurate/unchanged?
I think most of the formal translations are fine. KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB.....the normal formals. The message or the passion translation are examples of informal paraphrases. I would steer clear of those.
@@VelchinLab Thanks for responding, I own an ESV, do you think that'd be a good Bible for someone who wants to practice Orthodox Christianity? I've heard ESV was more geared towards Evangelists.