Study Bibles

[Beloved Servant]

In Isaiah,
Jesus is called the Everlasting Father.

[micah7:9]

Yeah I get it Beloved, I was just wondering "how it got in there?"

[Molly]

Mark 13:32
Amplified Bible (AMP)

32But of that day or that hour not a [single] person knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father



Common English Bible (CEB)


32 "But nobody knows when that day or hour will come, not the angels in heaven and not the Son. Only the Father knows.



Wycliffe Bible (WYC)

32 But of that day or hour no man knoweth, neither angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.



English Standard Version (ESV)

32"But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.


Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

32 "Now concerning that day or hour no one knows—neither the angels in heaven nor the Son —except the Father.

[Molly]

Yeah I get it Beloved, I was just wondering "how it got in there?"

Maybe it's time to ask a study Bible, or a 'professional,' or wait for revelation.

Or you could ask me.  But I wouldn't give my answer until after Christmas.

[WhiteWings]

Jesus knew a lot.  That's why people called him, Rabbi [meaning [professional] teacher].

Yeah, ummm, OK!
He knew a lot.
Not everything — but —  a lot!

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

I know that Scripture but —
How can that be if He and the Father are One?

The scriputure I've quoted is very clear.
About the forbidden question I'll just give two possibilties for you to discuss with your puppy :laughing7:
a] "Are one" = Same toughts. Same team. Same goals. Same character. Same ....
b] As part of His presence on earth the knowledge of Jesus was great but limited (for divine reasons).

[micah7:9]

Mat 24:36 But of thilke dai and our no man wote, nethir aungels of heuenes, but the fadir aloone. (John Wycliffe 1395)

Lamsa Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text. From the Aramaic of the Pecrapta "But concerning that day and hour, no man knows, not even the angels of heaven, but the Father alone."

Just wondering how and when "nor the Son," came about that's all my friend. I am able to accept either way with understanding.

"Maybe it's time to ask a study Bible, or a 'professional,' or wait for revelation.

Or you could ask me.  But I wouldn't give my answer until after Christmas."( Molly)

No help from there.

[Molly]

Take a look at the Mark 13:32 in your wycliff 1395 Bible [whatever that is], Micah.  What does it say?

[micah7:9]

Take a look at the Mark 13:32 in your wycliff 1395 Bible [whatever that is], Micah.  What does it say?

Mar 13:32 But of that dai or our no man woot, nether aungels in heuene, nether the sone, but the fadir.

Also in the Lamsa it has "neither the Son"

Its the John Wycliffe 1395 translation of the Bible Molly.

[micah7:9]

Jesus knew a lot.  That's why people called him, Rabbi [meaning [professional] teacher].

Yeah, ummm, OK!
He knew a lot.
Not everything — but —  a lot!

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

I know that Scripture but —
How can that be if He and the Father are One?

The scriputure I've quoted is very clear.
About the forbidden question I'll just give two possibilties for you to discuss with your puppy :laughing7:
a] "Are one" = Same toughts. Same team. Same goals. Same character. Same ....
b] As part of His presence on earth the knowledge of Jesus was great but limited (for divine reasons).

I don't know about "limited" but it was for divine reasons. :thumbsup:

[Molly]

Take a look at the Mark 13:32 in your wycliff 1395 Bible [whatever that is], Micah.  What does it say?

Mar 13:32 But of that dai or our no man woot, nether aungels in heuene, nether the sone, but the fadir.

Also in the Lamsa it has "neither the Son"

Its the John Wycliffe 1395 translation of the Bible Molly.

wow. Cool.  That must be the oldest English translation.  That's why it reads like Chaucer.


But Cristes lore, and his apostles twelve,
He taught; but first he folwed it himselve.
--G. Chaucer

[jabcat]

Mix UR with Messanic Jews and you are close to the ideal mix I think....

Here are my thoughts;    It's wonderful their veil has been lifted and they can see the Messiah.  Praise God!

Not sure I agree with that. You make it sound they are sub-standard Christians.

However, Peter and James taught Jewish believers who, although they experienced the Messiah, were not far removed from their lifetime of Jewish temple worship, so they maintained much of the culture, views, and even religious activities of the Old Covenant.  Some of them were even still teaching one must be circumcised.".

What do you prefer? A world filled with Peters or a world filled with Augustines?

On the other hand, Paul taught [a mixture of Messianic Jews and pagans] that they no longer needed to observe the Jewish/OT customs, that those things were only a shadow of what they were now able to see and experience (Jesus), and that no one had the right to judge them for it.

So as I said, it's wonderful Messianic Jews experience Jesus, but I believe some of them are as the ones that James and Peter taught;  still not very far removed from their cultural and religious activities and observances, still participating in the "shadow" of the Old Covenant.  I certainly don't believe they are to be judged for that at all, and some gentiles wish to participate in some of those activities (days, feasts, etc.) and have the freedom to do so.  But I believe given time, as the personal relationship with Jesus increases, many of them will move away from those shadows, as they grow more and more into their realized freedom of "whom the SON makes free is free indeed".

Firstly I wrote the messanics should be mixed with UR. Little more liberal. Not so strickt in regulations.
1] Messanic Jews.
2] Orthodox Jews.
3] Orthodox Christianity.

For me that's the order how I see it. Messanic Jews are closed to God and Jesus. Orthdox Christian are far of. Just a bunch of pagans. :spank: <- WW

I'm glad they've seen the Light, but just like all of us, then they still have much growth to do.  And to put it bluntly, why stay in the shadows when having been exposed to the Light?     *Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.  These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.  Col. 2:16,17

I'm not talking about orthodox Christianity, nor a hierarchy of who's "substandard" or "the best".  But IMO, one group following Augustine's beliefs, and the other holding to the Old Covenant customs and rituals, which Paul is clear are no longer required, doesn't make one "any better than the other".  That's not what it's about according to my view.  It's great Messianic Jews have been shown Jesus.  Also, I've repeatedly said I consider believers on Christ who are also hell believers, my brothers and sisters, because they do believe in Jesus as their Savior - which the Bible says is what it takes to attain salvation - not believing in UR or following OT religious customs.   

So...you said "Mix UR with Messanic Jews and you are close to the ideal mix."   I personally don't believe in mixing the Old Covenant with grace, freedom, and the new "law" of love - and I don't believe the NT teaches to do so.  Now, if I can live by it, my thought is, all are important to the body, the first will be last, the last will be first - and all saved only by grace.  :dsunny:

[micah7:9]

Take a look at the Mark 13:32 in your wycliff 1395 Bible [whatever that is], Micah.  What does it say?

Mar 13:32 But of that dai or our no man woot, nether aungels in heuene, nether the sone, but the fadir.

Also in the Lamsa it has "neither the Son"

Its the John Wycliffe 1395 translation of the Bible Molly.

wow. Cool.  That must be the oldest English translation.  That's why it reads like Chaucer.


But Cristes lore, and his apostles twelve,
He taught; but first he folwed it himselve.
--G. Chaucer

Yeah abit hard to understand at times.

[Molly]

Take a look at the Mark 13:32 in your wycliff 1395 Bible [whatever that is], Micah.  What does it say?

Mar 13:32 But of that dai or our no man woot, nether aungels in heuene, nether the sone, but the fadir.

Also in the Lamsa it has "neither the Son"

Its the John Wycliffe 1395 translation of the Bible Molly.

wow. Cool.  That must be the oldest English translation.  That's why it reads like Chaucer.


But Cristes lore, and his apostles twelve,
He taught; but first he folwed it himselve.
--G. Chaucer

Yeah abit hard to understand at times.

yeah. He's writing phonetically, with a very thick accent.  :laughing7:

[Beloved Servant]

Jesus knew a lot.  That's why people called him, Rabbi [meaning [professional] teacher].

Yeah, ummm, OK!
He knew a lot.
Not everything — but —  a lot!

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

I know that Scripture but —
How can that be if He and the Father are One?

The scriputure I've quoted is very clear.
About the forbidden question I'll just give two possibilties for you to discuss with your puppy :laughing7:
a] "Are one" = Same toughts. Same team. Same goals. Same character. Same ....
b] As part of His presence on earth the knowledge of Jesus was great but limited (for divine reasons).

So, Jesus did not know "then," meaning while His Flesh walked the earth, but he does know "now."

[WhiteWings]

Mix UR with Messanic Jews and you are close to the ideal mix I think....

Here are my thoughts;    It's wonderful their veil has been lifted and they can see the Messiah.  Praise God!

Not sure I agree with that. You make it sound they are sub-standard Christians.

However, Peter and James taught Jewish believers who, although they experienced the Messiah, were not far removed from their lifetime of Jewish temple worship, so they maintained much of the culture, views, and even religious activities of the Old Covenant.  Some of them were even still teaching one must be circumcised.".

What do you prefer? A world filled with Peters or a world filled with Augustines?

On the other hand, Paul taught [a mixture of Messianic Jews and pagans] that they no longer needed to observe the Jewish/OT customs, that those things were only a shadow of what they were now able to see and experience (Jesus), and that no one had the right to judge them for it.

So as I said, it's wonderful Messianic Jews experience Jesus, but I believe some of them are as the ones that James and Peter taught;  still not very far removed from their cultural and religious activities and observances, still participating in the "shadow" of the Old Covenant.  I certainly don't believe they are to be judged for that at all, and some gentiles wish to participate in some of those activities (days, feasts, etc.) and have the freedom to do so.  But I believe given time, as the personal relationship with Jesus increases, many of them will move away from those shadows, as they grow more and more into their realized freedom of "whom the SON makes free is free indeed".

Firstly I wrote the messanics should be mixed with UR. Little more liberal. Not so strickt in regulations.
1] Messanic Jews.
2] Orthodox Jews.
3] Orthodox Christianity.

For me that's the order how I see it. Messanic Jews are closed to God and Jesus. Orthdox Christian are far of. Just a bunch of pagans. :spank: <- WW

I'm glad they've seen the Light, but just like all of us, then they still have much growth to do.  And to put it bluntly, why stay in the shadows when having been exposed to the Light?     *Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.  These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.  Col. 2:16,17

I'm not talking about orthodox Christianity, nor a hierarchy of who's "substandard" or "the best".  But IMO, one group following Augustine's beliefs, and the other holding to the Old Covenant customs and rituals, which Paul is clear are no longer required, doesn't make one "any better than the other".  That's not what it's about according to my view.  It's great Messianic Jews have been shown Jesus.  Also, I've repeatedly said I consider believers on Christ who are also hell believers, my brothers and sisters, because they do believe in Jesus as their Savior - which the Bible says is what it takes to attain salvation - not believing in UR or following OT religious customs.   

So...you said "Mix UR with Messanic Jews and you are close to the ideal mix."   I personally don't believe in mixing the Old Covenant with grace, freedom, and the new "law" of love - and I don't believe the NT teaches to do so.  Now, if I can live by it, my thought is, all are important to the body, the first will be last, the last will be first - and all saved only by grace.  :dsunny:

But I didn't write: Be a orthodox Jew  in all your ways and add believe in Jesus. Let's just say that many Christians take "nailed to the cross" a few steps to far.
I'm many Christains have very shallow knoledge of the ancient Jewish society. That limits their growth I think.
Likely their are Messanic is all sorts ranging from 99% Jew/1% Christian  to 1% Jew/99% Christian.
I think 50/50 would be a nice balance.
Obviously the Christian part should be UR Christian.
Synergy is teh key word James.
:2c:

[WhiteWings]

Take a look at the Mark 13:32 in your wycliff 1395 Bible [whatever that is], Micah.  What does it say?

Mar 13:32 But of that dai or our no man woot, nether aungels in heuene, nether the sone, but the fadir.

Also in the Lamsa it has "neither the Son"

Its the John Wycliffe 1395 translation of the Bible Molly.

wow. Cool.  That must be the oldest English translation.  That's why it reads like Chaucer.


But Cristes lore, and his apostles twelve,
He taught; but first he folwed it himselve.
--G. Chaucer

Yeah abit hard to understand at times.

Looks a bit like ancient Dutch at times.

[WhiteWings]

Jesus knew a lot.  That's why people called him, Rabbi [meaning [professional] teacher].

Yeah, ummm, OK!
He knew a lot.
Not everything — but —  a lot!

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

I know that Scripture but —
How can that be if He and the Father are One?

The scriputure I've quoted is very clear.
About the forbidden question I'll just give two possibilties for you to discuss with your puppy :laughing7:
a] "Are one" = Same toughts. Same team. Same goals. Same character. Same ....
b] As part of His presence on earth the knowledge of Jesus was great but limited (for divine reasons).

So, Jesus did not know "then," meaning while His Flesh walked the earth, but he does know "now."

If my only choice of answers would be yes or no I would say no. But I reserve the right to change that view 5 times a day  :winkgrin:
At the Last Supper Jesus seemed to limit Himself by saying He wouldn't drink the fruit of the grape until His marriage.
I think the Last Supper was a betrothel ceremony.
The man (Jesus) asks the hand of the girl (Christians) in the presence of the father (God) and if she agrees they discuss a price (cross). The man (Jesus) goes home (heaven) and starts building a room (many mansions in my fathers house). When the father (God) is satisfied with the bridal suite he (God) gives his son (Jesus) permission to get his (Jesus) bride (church).
Because the father decides when the room looks good enough the son doesn't know when he gets married because only the father knows when teh room is good enough.
:2c:

[Beloved Servant]

When, if not now, is Jesus called Everlasting Father.

[eaglesway]

One, United, Harmonious, In Agreement, In Love

I pray that you may become one, even as I and the Father are one, that I am in the Father and the Father is in me....

It amazes me that Christians will assault one anothers faith over the definitions of what it means that the Father and the son are "one"..... all the while unable to notice that Jesus prayed that we would BE one(that our joy be fulfilled).


The definition of gnosticism is that knowledge becomes the mode of believing while apprehending the reality of things believed becomes secondary or is disregarded entirely. In such a paradigm the priorities get switched and camels get swallowed as gnats get strained.

I would add that, if we can't discuss certain questions of our faith because we are unable to control the flesh in the process, we ought to add the disclaimer to our endeavors "OBSERVERS TAKE NOTICE, THESE ARE MOSTLY THE RANTINGS OF IMMATURE BELIEVERS, TAKE WITH AN APPROPRIATE GRAIN OF SALT".

Or maybe, "WE EAT FROM THE WRONG TREE IN HERE"

Or even, "WHAT I THINK IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE LOVE OF GOD BETWEEN US -SO THERE......"  :laughing7:

[Beloved Servant]

Just trying to reconcile Scriptures.

If Jesus and the Father are One, if Jesus is called The Everlasting Father, then how could he not know that day or hour?

[Molly]

If a servant cannot be greater than his master, how could we do even greater works than Jesus did?

[Beloved Servant]

So,
He does know that day and hour!

[Molly]

The Son doesn't, the Father does.

[Beloved Servant]

The Son doesn't, the Father does.

Doesn't that contradict what you said earlier:
"If a servant cannot be greater than his master, how could we do even greater works than Jesus did?"

[Molly]

It's all scripture, so nothing is contradicting.


although it might appear that way at first glance.

It's all about patterns and snapshots in time.