Hey Pedes, looking for clarity on a theory I'm mentally mulling around. It's kind of wild, but also, could have drastic implications if there is any truth to this.
I'll preface this by saying I am a believer in Christ, and only looking for truth, please don't shoot the messenger, this is an open debate and one I expect to see some heated emotions over.
The Greek word for "ante" is "αντι-", and although the current accepted translation of ἀντίχριστος is Anti-christ, there is little literature to explain the use of Anti vs Ante.
There is a possibility that the word "antichrist" in the Bible has been mistranslated or misunderstood, and that it may actually refer to an "ante-Christ," or a precursor to the coming of Christ, similar to how John the Baptist preceded Jesus. The book of Revelation, a highly symbolic and metaphorical text, may not actually predict a future apocalypse or end times, but rather symbolizes the ongoing struggle between good and evil in human history. According to this theory, the arrival of the "antechrist" figure may not be a negative event, but rather a necessary step in clearing the way for Jesus' return.
Let's analyze Trumps actions in contrast to the antechristos.
Abraham accords - negotiating peace with Isreal, only to turn his back in 3.5 years time. Does this fit with Biden getting into office?
The concept of a peace deal or covenant made by the antichrist is not explicitly mentioned in the book of Revelation, but it is described in some other parts of the Bible, particularly in the book of Daniel. In Daniel 9:27, it says:
"He [the antichrist] will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."
Is the end of sacrifice, the end of child, human sacrifice to Baal? Or worse? This kind fits to me. Especially considering the Mossad connections with Epstein et al.
in Revelation 13:3, where it says, "And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast." This wound is described as being healed, and as a result, people are amazed and follow the beast.
I've often wondered if Trump gaining the presidency again would fulfill this passage?
There is a lot more to this theory, but it's a lot to type out, I'll leave it at this for now.
There are alternatives to this as well, as Obama/Biden could also fulfill the above prophecy by Biden essentially being an Obama Manchurian candidate. I don't know enough about Obamas political deals with Isreal to make a call on the first one.
One final thing here, Is to look at the way Jesus responded to Caiaphas and the high Jewish court :
You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also."
This is very telling that Jesus did not see YahWeh as his "Father" in heaven. Jesus never once mentioned Yahweh when referencing the father. He used Abba, or other terms.
Thoughts, pedes?
The books were written in Greek, fren, and most of the larger audience would have trouble with either Hebrew characters mixed in Greek or an invented transliteration into Greek. The NT passages I listed are sufficient evidence to those who understand the culture that when Jesus was speaking Hebrew and Aramaic he used the name repeatedly. Further, as I said, Jesus also came in preincarnate form and used the name Yahweh repeatedly as attested in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Since you don't like the sacred name, the question turns to whether Jesus is who he says he is or whether you change his words about himself too. Is he one with the Father who created all things? Is he Lord and God, uniquely over everything and not just a random divine being? Is he the "I Am" before Abraham was? If you don't accept what he said about himself, you're not following him as Lord and shouldn't take the name "Christian".
The I Am he is referencing is when he met Moses on the mountain, on the first ascent. Claiming that the I Am sent him, and he was one in the same.
Exodus 3:14 “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’ ”
So is he the "I Am" or was he sent by the "I Am"?
He claims to be the son of the father in heaven, to which I agree. I do not however, feel that this is one in the same with Yahweh Elohim. The very fact that they use Elohim to describe Yahweh is suspect to me, if you understand what Elohim means.
I still, cannot find one provable instance where Jesus used the name Yahweh to describe his father in heaven. You'd think one who is in such a position, preaching to Jewish people, it would be a pretty common name to use, wouldn't it?
What about the descriptions of Yahweh? He was depicted as being Dragon like in many passages. Many biblical passages imply that Yahweh physically consumed his meat offerings unlike the "fake" gods of other cultures. The Bible is very specific that Yahweh wanted salt on his meat as well, suggesting these offereing were physically consumed and not merely burned to ashes.
Or the fact he demanded virgins as a spoil of war in numbers 31? What would the great I Am even want with 32 virgins? Are you aware that women of the time were married off as soon as they menstruated? so this makes it what? 32 girls before the age of 13. Hmm.
Examples? Here:
2 Samuel 22
7 In my distress I called upon the Lord, And cried out to my God; He heard my voice from His temple, And my cry entered His ears. 8 "Then the earth shook and trembled; The foundations of heaven quaked and were shaken, Because He was angry. 9 Smoke went up from His nostrils, And devouring fire from His mouth;... 16 The foundations of the world were uncovered... At the blast of the breath of His nostrils.
Exodus 19
18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the LORD descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.
Exodus 33
20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. 21 And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: 22 And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: 23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.
Exo 40: 34 Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. 35 And Moses was not able to enter into the tent of the congregation, because the cloud abode thereon, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.
Psa 61: 4 I will abide in thy tabernacle for ever: I will trust in the covert of thy wings.
Psa 91: 4 He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.
The highest heavenly creatures are called Seraphim, a word which the highly esteemed and scholarly Jewish Enclyclopedia states means "fiery flying serpent", though medieval Christians have transformed these "dragons" into the more familiar, swan-winged, "cartoon" angels of popular culture. When the ancient Jews translated the word Seraphim into Greek, the word they used was drakon, which is the word our modern "dragon" is derived from.
Jesus seemed to allude to this in his address to Caiaphas and the Jewish priests when being sentenced, as I said in my OP, pointing out that his father in heaven was not the one the Jews and others worshiped known as Yahweh.
Let's not forget that Moses people broke the covenant he made with the I Am on the mountain, before he even got to the foot of the mountain. He broke the tablets and returned back to the mountain and then had to chisel the stones himself? Why did the I Am not make him new ones? Did he perhaps meet Yahweh the second time, and not Jesus?
I understand your passion in these matters, as I have a passion for it as well, but I also value the ability to reason and test out every theory to its end, before accepting a truth. To insinuate i am not a Christian, really just places you in the seat of ignorance. As per Christianity, I am saved by Jesus work, not my own. Works based salvation is a lie, so, how can my fault in understanding, or search for the truth condemn me? We were told to test everything, so I'm not sure how you could take a stance of denying my salvation based on my previous posts. That itself is pretty anti Christian, imho.
Glad you're thinking it over! The answer is yes. He is both.
The entity in the burning bush, which was Jesus, gave three names, Yahweh, Ehyeh, and Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh. These are all ways of saying "I am I" so as to make the same point. Jesus is one with the Creator who has these and many names. Let's call the Creator Ehyeh to distinguish him from the malevolent one.
It means, just as Jesus could be human and still "one in/and the same" with Ehyeh, Jesus could also come as an angel (an El or Eloah) and still be one and the same with Ehyeh. When the Uncreated comes, he always follows the rules he set up for created beings, he doesn't set up laws of physics to change them arbitrarily. The fact that some humans and some elohim screwed up doesn't deny his right to come as el or man.
You'll need to define standards of proof. It's impossible to find a Hebrew word in a fully Greek manuscript. Either you recognize preincarnate Jesus described in Hebrew manuscripts, or you recognize how linguistic criticism determines spoken Hebrew words from Greek transcriptions, or you recognize that the data points you're limiting yourself to have no power to answer your question.
And?
They became temple servants. It sounds like you're claiming Christianity while reading interpretations from anti-Christians. Questing the nature of Jesus and the Creator doesn't involve using enemy talking points.
You then list several Scriptures, which are perfectly harmonizable with Jesus's Father when dealing with sin. Did you read Revelation recently, particularly 1-3 and 17-20? Jesus is fully participatory in wrath against the wicked, but he waits the right time just as Ehyeh did in the past.
And?
No, I didn't see this in OP or would've commented. You cited John 8:19, Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also (KJV). Everyone knew that upon Jesus's baptism a bat-kol (idiom for heavenly voice, literally daughter of a voice) had been heard, claiming paternity over Jesus; everyone knew that Jesus's earthly father was Joseph, who was prepared to be considered a cuck all his life. When these Pharisees ask the question, they are denying Jesus's claims that his Father is the LORD (Yahweh, as he said when he quoted Hebrew Scripture repeatedly), and giving in to rumors that he was a bastard. Further, they are breaking with their Amoraic (Talmudic) tradition, in which every time a bat-kol is heard it is to be taken as authoritative from the Creator (only one exception occurred, sketchily, in the 2nd century). Jesus's answer to all this was that their denial of miracle proved that they had no interest in the Yahweh they paid lip-service to; a few of them might indeed have been serving the counterfeit, Yaldabaoth.
Note, this was not when he was sentenced. That testimony is a different statement of "I Am" claiming identity with Yahweh, Mark 14:61-62: Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Replying to the euphemism "the Blessed" with the revealed name of the Father Yahweh, translated as "Ego eimi", showed that Jesus was unafraid to speak the name and spoke it to show up people who wouldn't speak it (for fear that they had the wrong Yahweh).
I've never heard that theory. You think Jesus is so impotent as to let someone else masquerade as him right after he delivered the Ten Words and get away with it for 3,500 years? The impostor has no power, he can only corrupt the truth already given. The reason Moses wrote the second tablets is that man must learn to work with God rather than God doing all the work alone. The text says he met with Yahweh both times, and describes (in Exodus 24 and 32) this Yahweh coming in angelic form, and all comings of Yahweh were his Word (Messenger) Yeshua.
I'm not going to deny your salvation, but I'll test it. Your confession is "I am a believer in Christ, and only looking for truth", which means that you and others who pursue truth, such as myself, will always come to agreement sooner or later in the pursuit. The questions I ask you are about whether you believe in the same Jesus that the historical church believes in, who is one with the Creator revealed in the Old Testament, or whether you separate some works of Yahweh from being works of Jesus as well. If a person doesn't know Jesus the way others do and attributes Jesus's work and being to another entity than others do, that one must question whether the others have the same Jesus; you must certainly question me too. If you are saved by Jesus's work as you say, he will guide you into all truth, and salvation includes a changed spirit so that spirit will be his means of guidance. Since we are led by the Spirit and the Word, we will come to the same conclusion, and the deeper the wilder.
TLDR: I've answered your questions so as to explain where I believe the truth stands. You've indicated what you believe, though I don't see all the implications and conclusions you are seeing. But truth is always one, and Jesus is Truth. Are you one who is committed to follow Jesus wherever he goes, including surrendering mistaken notions to him when convicted? Because I am.