2015. december 19., szombat

A statement of faith

A statement of true faith
I believe in one God, Yehouah, the Father Almighty,

and in Yesus The Anointed, his only begotten Son, our Lord,
who came from heaven to be born on earth through Mary, a virgin, by the holy spirit (the mind-power of God),
was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
died and buried, rose from the dead on the third day,
ascended to the heavens, and sits on the right hand of the Father,
whence he will come, to judge the living and the dead;
and in the holy spirit, the holy church, the remission of sins,
the resurrection of the death and in the eternal life. Amen!

2015. október 23., péntek

Awesome one God, the Father Almighty

"May God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ give you grace and peace." Ephesians 1:2
I am a Bible believer, a born again Christian, from Romania. All of us have a great opportunity to read the Bible and believe it. We have the great opportunity to be saved, if will accept Lord Jesus Christ sacrifice and teachings and keep it holy in our life...
Friends, we have an awesome one God, the Father Almighty, and he have a great, unique only begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. All of us could be adopted sons of God, through his Son, and through him, we could have an awesome one God, the Father Almighty, the Creator of Heaven and Earth, who reigns from Heaven above, with great wisdom, mighty power and deep love.
Our God and Father is wise:
Jeremiah 10:12 "He has made the earth by his power, he has established the world by his wisdom, and by his understanding has he stretched out the heavens:"

Our God and Father is strong:
Isaiah 40:26 "Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing."

Our God and Father is just:
Deuteronomy 32:4
"He is the Rock; his deeds are perfect.
Everything he does is just and fair.
He is a faithful God who does no wrong;
how just and upright he is!"

Our God and Father is loving:
John 3:16 “For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life."

Our God and Father is worthy of praise:
Luke 10:21 "In that same hour he (Jesus) rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will."
Our God and Father is a loving God and Father, is strong, wise and righteous, so is very worthy of glory for all what he do! This is his Son also. Let's be like our God and Father, loving, wise, strong and righteous and glorify him!

Amen, amen!
John Takacs, Romania

2015. március 2., hétfő

Announcement - For founding a Bible study group

Announcement - For founding a Bible study group in my town.
Peace of God!
I would be interested in opening an independent church (neo-protestant) which reject the version taken from the Roman Catholic Church, preaching paterteism (only the Father is God, but his Son existed in heaven before he coming on Earth) and faith in the mortality of the soul - and it's resurrection with the body, in God's appointed day.
For those interested, e.mail bibliaantica@yahoo.com  


2015. február 21., szombat

The "archangel Christology" an "Angel Christology"? No!

Peace and grace for all the people who want's the peace and grace of God and his Son,

The "archangel Christology" an "Angel Christology"? No. The archangel is not "an angel". In Hebrew (hasar hagadol, Daniel 12,1) means "great prince", a "prince" (sar) like in Isaiah 9:6 "sar shalom". He is between God and angels.
In the heaven exist three ranks: God, the archangel and the angels.


The Protestants of Geneva, Adventists and Jehovah Witnesses weren't the first to reason that Jesus is Michael the Archangel:
"In a number of passages we read of an angel who is superior to the six angels of God's inner council, and who is regularly described as "most venerable", "holy", and "glorious". This angel is given the name of Michael, and the conclusion is difficult to escape that Hermas (was the brother of the Bishop of Rome) saw in him the Son of God and equated him with the archangel Michael. Both, for example, are invested with supreme power over the people of God; both pronounce judgment on the faithful; and both hand sinners over to the angel of repentance to reform them. ... The evidence to be collected from the Apostolic Fathers is meagre, and tantalizingly inconclusive. There is evidence also, as we observed in the preceding paragraph, of attempts to interpret Christ as a sort of supreme angel; here the influence of Jewish angelology is discernible." - Early Christian Doctrines, by JND Kelly, pp 94, 95
In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, John A. Lees says:
"The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the preincarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the "child" and the archangel in Rev 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Dnl (for a full discussion see Hengstenberg, Offenbarung, I, 611-22, and an interesting survey in English by Dr. Douglas in Fairbairn B{ible} D{ictionary}." (1930, Vol. III), p. 2048.
"ARCHANGEL. This word is only twice used in the Bible, 1 Thess. 4:16; Jude 9. In the last passage it is applied to Michael, who, in Dan. 10:13,21; 12:1, is described as having a special charge of the Jewish Nation, and in Rev. 12:7-9 as the leader of an angelic army. So exalted are the position and offices ascribed to Michael, that many think the Messiah is meant." - Inter-National Bible Dictionary, published by Logos International, Plainfield, New Jersey, p. 35.
John Wesley's Note on the Whole Bible:
Daniel Chapter 10
5. A certain man; Very probably Christ, who appeared to Daniel in royal and priestly robes, and in so great brightness and majesty.
13. Withstood me; God suffered the wicked counsels of Cambyses to take place awhile; but Daniel by his prayers, and the angel by his power, overcame him at last: and this very thing laid a foundation of the ruin of the Persian monarchies. Michael; Michael here is commonly supposed to mean Christ. I remained; To counter-work their designs against the people of God
21. Michael; Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of the earth desert or oppose it.
C. H. Spurgeon from "Mornings and Evenings":
"To whom do we owe all this? Let the Lord Jesus Christ be for ever endeared to us, for through Him we are made to sit in heavenly places far above principalities and powers. He it is whose camp is round about them that fear Him; He is the true Michael whose foot is upon the dragon. All hail, Jesus! thou Angel of Jehovah's presence, to Thee this family offers its morning vows."

There is no other archangel in heaven, just Michael. Gabriel is not an archangel, he is an angel. And other names we don't have for any so called archangels "Raphael and Co" were invented.

2015. február 20., péntek

My understanding regarding John 1:1 and Daniel 10:13

Peace and grace from God, the Father Almighty, and from Lord Yeshua his Son. I am a Bible believer from 1991, and a patertheist non-trinitarian from 1992. I believe in one and only God, the Father Almighty (John 17:1-3). And like Adventists believe, I also believe that the Son of God is Michael, the Archangel.
My understanding regarding John 1:1:
Here we are the Greek text: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεός ἦν ὁ λόγος.
Is possible that in the very beginning, the autograph writing of John 1:1 have a missing word, ignored or deleted later by a scribe in the early II century: In beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and like God was the Word.
My understanding of Daniel 10:13
Michael is the first (achad) of the chief heads, compare with Daniel 12:1
Young's Literal Translation
'And the head of the kingdom of Persia is standing over-against me twenty and one days, and lo, Michael, first of the chief heads, hath come in to help me, and I have remained there near the kings of Persia;
Young's Literal Translation
'And at that time stand up doth Michael, the great head, who is standing up for the sons of thy people, and there hath been a time of distress, such as hath not been since there hath been a nation till that time, and at that time do thy people escape, every one who is found written in the book.
Best regards,
John Takacs, Floresti, Romania
My e.mail: bibliaantica@yahoo.com
My blogs:
About Biblical manuscripts, and themes
About conditionalism, annihilationism and the mortality of the soul


2014. december 20., szombat

Varvan "Gabor" velemenyet

 Gábor szerint:
Kedves János
A pontok, amiket felsoroltál valóban problémát jelentenek, de azért az okból, mert nem ismerik a Szentírás ezekre vonatkozó kijelentéseit és nem azért mert nem hisznek a lélekalvásban.
A hozzászólásod első felén már én is gondolkodtam, hogy a helytelen ismeret (más alapvetőbb kérdésekben – bár ki dönti el, hogy mi számít annak), helytelen hitet eredményez és ez nem zár-e ki a mennyből.

Kedves Gabor,

A Biblia szovegenek a helyes forditasa lenyegretoro es eletfontossagu az ilyen szelsosegek elkerulese vegett. Nos, kedves felebaratom, Gabor, ha Adam meg megengedi, feltennem neked a kovetkezo kerdest: Tudsz angolul? Gondolom igen, mivel egy angol nyelvu linket ajanlottal. Ezek szerint el tudtad olvasni az angol anyagot amit itt bemuatattam a Lk 23:43-al kapcsolatban? Gondolom igen. Kerlek reagalj erre az anyagra:
Re: Luke 23:43 – Where does the comma go?

Szerintem a ketto osszevag es ha nem lenne a lelekhalhatatlansaganak hite, ezek sem lennenek, mert van ok es okozat, az ok a lelekhalhatatlansag es az okozat a felsorolt dolgok.
Igazsagtalan dolog, ezt a hitet (a lelekhalalt) adventista vagy jehovista alapnak nevezni, mondom ezt mivel latom forgolodtal exjt jtsek kozott. Egyfelol a jehovistak az adventistaktol vettek at, masfelol az exadventista DM Canright szerint a soul-sleep tanat a szombattarto adventistak a vasarnaptarto adventistaktol vettek at, ezek pedig George Storrs altal egy angliai baptistatol, mar a "nagy csalodas" elott 1842-ben. De ez csak reszben igaz, mivel mas forrasokbol is ihletodtek, pl William Millert egy kriasztadelfianus leader gyozte meg 1844 utan, egy masik forras pedig a Hetednapi Baptistak voltak, akik kozul nehanyan attertek az adventistakhoz, magukkal hozva regi hituket, amelyt mar a hetednapos Oswald Glait-tol (1490-1546)orokoltek. Kalvin Janos Genfi vallasdiktator ket dolog miatt gyulolte a kornyeke anabaptistait, amiert tagadtak az altala magyarazott lelekhalhatatlansagot es amiert elvetettek a csecsemokeresztseget. Nezz csak be ide:
 The Last hymn of Georg "Blaurock" 1529

(He also advocating soul sleeping until God's Kingdom:
My soul I leave in God's great Hand,
Until Your Kingdom, sleeping. (167, 8))

God will be judge in righteousness
With no one Him gainsaying;
His will, not ours, will be the test,
His sentence just pronouncing.

His Word does prove the hearts of men,
All seekers true converting;
Believe that Word and be baptized,
Obey your daily reading.

He marks you out from all mankind,
From Sin's grim power releases;
And for the wayward, godless, blind,
Their sad affliction ceases.

And so, Zion, God's people called,
Show all you have been given;
You will obtain a glorious crown,
With all your sins forgiven.

The Last great Day comes hastening on,
It warns us to be watching;
So help us, Lord, to bear the cross,
Your holy Purpose matching.

O Lord, direct us by Your grace;
And on Your love depending,
May Providence our lives control
Your Mighty Hand defending.

And as I now must part from friends,
From brothers, sisters weeping;
My soul I leave in God's great Hand,
Until Your Kingdom, sleeping. (167, 8)


Nos, akkor hogyan lehet vilagga kurtolni - foleg az exjehovistakat oktatoktol, hogy akik a soul-sleep tanat valjak az adventista hit-alapbol veszik? Akkor Devai Biro Matyas, "Magyarorszag Luthere", Oscar Cullman, "A papak tanacsadoja" es mas nevezetes szemelyisegek az andentista alapbol ihletodtek? Mert, mint Denis Diderot enciklikaja mondja, ez a hit mar megvolt a masodik szazadban, ugyanis az univerzalis megmentes (apokasztaszisz) es a tisztitotuz (purgatorium) apostola, az utolso nagy gnosztikus, Origenesz, tobb alkalommal jart Arabia Petraba, hogy a osi keresztyenek igaz hitet lerontsa. Jeruzsalem elpusztitasa elotti idoben (70) a zsidokeresztyenek Pella videkere menekultek a Jordan tulso oldalara. Ez pedig kozel van az Arabia Petra tartomany Bocra nevu varosahoz. Itt vivta meg csatait az utolso nagy gnosztikus, Origenesz, a lelekhalhatatlansag oldalan. De vajon Origenesz helyesen hasogatta az iget a lelekhalhatatlansag mellett, ha ket kulcsfontossagu dologban annyira messze ment, hirdetve az univerzalis megmentes es a tisztitotuz (purgatorium) tanat?

Akkor Gabor, Adam engedelmevel, ha o megengedi nekunk a disputa tovabbi folytatasat, kerlek erre reagalj:
Re: Luke 23:43 – Where does the comma go?

John Albu (rt20@columbia.edu)
Fri, 2 Aug 1996 00:13:58 -0400

For the punctuation marks in Luke 23:43, three possibilities have been offered: to put a comma before the word “today,” to put it after “today,” or to put a comma both before and after “today.” — See “Understanding and Translating ‘Today’ in Luke 23.43,” by J. Hong, published in “The Bible Translator,” Vol. 46, 1995, pp. 408-417.

Early Greek manuscripts had no punctuation, but occasionally it is found in some MSS, and this is the case here, where B (the Vatican 1209) has a lower point ((hypostigme) after semeron. Regarding the punctuation used by this MS, it was noted that in general “B has the higher point as a period, the lower point for a shorter pause.” (A. T. Robertson, “A Grammar of the Greek New Testament,” Nashville, 1934, p. 242) The ink of the uncial letters in codex B was at one time a faded brown color, and in a later century a scribe traced over many of the letters and punctuation marks.
However, in Luke 23:43 the ink of the lower point is the same as the letters of the text, and thus it can be traced back to the fourth century C.E.

The Vatican 1209 uses punctuation marks also in other places. Thus, at Romans 8:5, ABCL and 26 cursives have a point after sarka.

Does anybody know any MS that displays some kind of punctuation in Luke 23:43, beside the Vatican 1209?

The Curetonian Syriac (fifth century C.E.) renders Luke 23:43: “Amen, I say to thee to-day that with me thou shalt be in the Garden of Eden.'”–F. C. Burkitt, “The Curetonian Version of the Four Gospels,” Vol. I, Cambridge, 1904.

Below I am quoting from several Greek sources, in transliteration and providing an English translation. I would appreciate if improvements would be offered for the English renderings.

Tines men houtos anaginoskousin* _Amen lego soi semeron*_ kai hypostizousin* eita epipherousin, hotiet’ emou ese e to paradeiso._
(“Some indeed read this way: ‘Truly I tell you today,’ and put a comma;
then they add: ‘You will be with me in Paradise.'” –Hesychius of Jerusalem, an ecclessiastical writer who died about 434 C.E. Greek text found in Patrologia Graeca, Vol. 93, columns 432, 1433.

Alloi de ekbiazontai to rhema, stizontes eis to <> hin’ e to
legomenon toiouton* <> eita to, <> epipherontes. (“But others press upon the saying,
putting a punctuation mark after ‘today,’ so that it would be said
this way: ‘Truly I tell you today'; and then they add the expression:
‘You will be with me in Paradise.'”)–Theophylact, an ecclessistical
writer who died about 1112 C.E. Edition: Patrologia Graeca, Vol. 123,
column 1104.

alloi — to rheton ekbiazontai* legousin gar dein hypostizontas (254:
hypostizantas) anaginoskein* amen lego soi semeron*>> eith’ houtos
epipherein to* met’ emou ese etc. (“Others press upon what is spoken;
for they say it must read by putting a comma thus: ‘Truly I tell you
today,’ and then adding the expression this way: ‘You will be with me’
etc.”)–Scholia 237, 239, 254. Text found in Novum Testamentum Graece,
editio octava critica maior, by C. Tischendorf, Vol. I, Leipzig, 1869,
under Luke 23:43.

kai eutys eipen moi hoti amen amen semeron lego soi, met’ emou ese en
to parad[eiso]. (“And immediately he said to me: ‘Most truly today
I tell you, You will be with me in Paradise.'”)–Descent into Hades,
an apocryphal writing of the fourth century C.E. Text found in Novum
Testamentum Graece, editio octava critica maior, by C. Tischendorf, Vol. I, Leipzig,869, under Luke 23:43.

ho de eipen auto* semeron lego soi aletheian hina se ekho eis ton
parad[eison] met’ emou. (“And he said to him: ‘Today I tell you the
truth, that I should have you in Paradise with me.'”)–Gospel of
Nicodemus (=Acts of Pilate)b287, an apocryphal writing of the fourth
or fifth century C.E. Text found in Novum Testamentum Graece, editio
octava critica maior, by C. Tischendorf, Vol. I, Leipzig, 1869, under
Luke 23:43.

Therefore, at least from the fourth century C.E. until well into the
twelfth century C.E. there were readers who understood the text at Luke
23:43 as “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” On
that very day, when Jesus died, he was in Sheol or Hades, and not in
Paradise. (Psalms 16:8-11; Acts 2:22-32) He was dead and in the tomb
until the third day and was then resurrected as “the firstfruits” of the resurrection. (Acts 10:40; 1 Corinthians 15:20; Colossians 1:18) Thus, the word “today” at Luke 23:43 does not give the time of the evildoer’s being with Jesus in Paradise.

To the Christians and Muslims, about the life atfter death doctrine, according to the old time faith

To the Christians and Muslims, about the life atfter death doctrine, according to the old time faith

Peace on you, Salam aleikum,

According to the Old Time Faith, is no life after death, before the resurrection. Both parties - Modern Christians and Muslims, who is a Christian branch - are wrong in this doctrine. The old-time believers don't admitted the life after death, before the resurrection.
 THNETOPSYCHITES, s. mr. pl. (Hist. Ecclesiast) ancient heretics, believing that the human soul was perfectly similar to that of beasts, and that she was dying with the body. See.

This word is composed of θνητὸς Greek, mortal, and ψυχὴ, soul.

It is found nowhere in these heretics St. John Damascene, heres. xc. to unless they are the same as those mentioned by Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast. liv. IX. c. xxxviij. where it is said that in the time of Origen there had Saudi heretics, believing that the human soul was dying with the body, but ressusciteroit with the body at the end of the world. Eusebius adds Origen refuted these heretics in numerous council, and bringing them back from their mistakes. Augustine & Isidore called Arab heretics.

Marshal in his tables, disfigured word fault of the hearing because he writes thenopsychites in the town of thnetopsychites: It also puts in the sixth century, but we can not guess on what basis he fact.

 THNETOPSYCHITES, s. m. pl. (Hist. ecclésiast) anciens hérétiques, croyant que l’ame humaine étoit parfaitement semblable à celle des bêtes, & qu’elle mouroit avec le corps. Voyez .

Ce mot est composé du grec θνητὸς, mortel, & ψυχὴ, ame.

On ne trouve nulle part ces hérétiques que dans S. Jean Damascene, hérés. xc. à-moins qu’ils ne soient les mêmes que ceux dont parle Eusebe, hist. ecclésiast. liv. IX. c. xxxviij. où il est dit que du tems d’Origene il y avoit en Arabie des hérétiques, croyant que l’ame humaine mouroit avec le corps, mais qu’elle ressusciteroit avec le corps à la fin du monde. Eusebe ajoute qu’Origene réfuta ces hérétiques dans un concile nombreux, & qu’il les fit revenir de leurs erreurs. S. Augustin & Isidore les appellent hérétiques arabes.

Marshal, dans ses tables, a défiguré ce mot faute de l’entendre, car il l’écrit thenopsychites, au-lieu de thnetopsychites : il les place aussi dans le sixieme siecle, mais on ne peut deviner sur quel fondement il l’a fait.

Diderot - Encyclopedie 1ere edition tome 16.djvu/281

Blessings in the truth,