Greetings Friends,
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Messiah Yeshua.
I (Jim Masterson) want to go on record saying, I’m more
than willing to discuss the material found within both of my books. I'll begin by asking if the others are prepared
to reveal the source of everything they're about to bring into the conversation. I’ll establish mine as being the Spirit of God; which will be in
agreement with everything Yeshua (as given to Him by God) said, and did.
Whether a person is ready [willing] to say yes, or no to that, I‘m [still] willing to continue on with
the conversation. The person choosing to [avoid] not answer questions pertaining to the [topic] will leave me no choice
but to walk away from it. I have no interest in investing [quality]
time on a person that's not willing to take part in both ends of the conversation.
I was asked (recently) by a person having the means to get
it done, “Are you (Jim) prepared to go on a (radio) talk show, or the (TV) news
with your message? Are you comfortable with speaking before an audience?" I not
only said “yes,” to all that, I said to her “I’m expecting no less. God has
been preparing me for such a time as this for quite some time now. Yes! I’m
ready,” to her.
In Love, In His Care…Jim
P.S.
August 12, 2015
This was added on for the sake of making it
easier for you all. By placing John’s
comment, along with my response to it on the same page, you’ll find it much
easier to follow. The good thing is,
with hind sight being 20/20, and by the grace of God, my position remains the
same. I’m going to respond to John’s
comment, paragraph by paragraph, with great care.
Jim,
I do not accept that you have heard from the Spirit of God in your message. Why, because your facts are incorrect, your answers are illogical, and it is a blatant form of coercion and manipulation. I know you think or believe you have heard something special from God, yet your position is not supported by the Scriptures.
I do not accept that you have heard from the Spirit of God in your message. Why, because your facts are incorrect, your answers are illogical, and it is a blatant form of coercion and manipulation. I know you think or believe you have heard something special from God, yet your position is not supported by the Scriptures.
My response:
My position is not supported by [man’s
interpretations] of the Scriptures. Why,
because it’s man’s interpretations of the Scriptures, not what’s actually
written in the Bible, making, better yet forcing Yeshua to be “the Son is God,”
God.
Next Paragraph:
Consider this, in the old testament, if
a prophet claiming to be speaking from God, was incorrect about one part of his
message he was to be stoned as a false prophet. This is how serious the issue
really is.
My Response:
I agree, this is a serious issue.
Consider this: in the New Testament those preaching Yeshua’s gospel, not their
own, were not only stoned to death, some were crucified, and, beheaded. By the
way, just for the sake of accuracy, I’m not claiming to be a prophet.
Next Paragraph:
I also do not accept your premise that
I or anyone else must say "the Spirit of God" before stating a
verifiable fact, an opinion, or an explanation. If it comes out of a man’s
mouth via his brain then it is man’s opinion. Whether it is from the Spirit of
God, that is to be tested by the veracity of the message amongst God’s
community. By insisting upon this, you are urging people and yourself to take
the Lord's name in vain. It is careless, and disrespectful to my Lord Jesus and
His Father to invoke HIs name unless one is a prophet.
My Response:
“Tested by the veracity of the message
amongst God’s community.”? My friend, if “God’s community” isn’t willing to say
as given by the Spirit of God, whose authority, concerning the message they’re
preaching, are they claiming to be under? When it comes to Yeshua’s “God”
status, coming from either side of the argument, there has to be a source.
Next Paragraph:
Not all visions, or voices or spirits
or healings come from God. Many are deceived. Why does John write “do not
believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God,
because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” Do you know any
Believers? If you do, ask them what they think of your message.
My Response:
“Do you know any believers”? I know
you, yet at the same time we’re saying two different things. You’re going to
lean on those having the same mind set as you; which doesn’t make all of you
right and me wrong. I know you just quoted a verse of Scripture, but where did
the idea of asking people what they believe have anything to do with what the
Spirit of God is teaching me. That verse of Scripture, in John’s writings, is
telling me to do the exact opposite of what you’re suggesting. It’s telling me
not to trust in man, but the Spirit of God, instead.
Next Paragraph:
As far as your reference to “man’s
interpretation” you use this to avoid dialog and communictation. When you
cannot answer a question or that it goes against your opinion, you say that it
is “man’s opinion” and that you agree with Yeshua and Paul and Peter. That is
[zero] no value. It is a form of manipulation and undermines your credibility.
My Response:
“It is a form of manipulation and
undermines your credibility.”? John, how would you interpret the words “Blessed
be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” which will be found in the
Bible, to say, mean, anything but Yeshua’s God, and Father, is the same God and
Father of the people "our" the writer is speaking of? For “credibility”
sake, don’t be found guilty of avoiding the question.
Next Paragraph:
The Bible itself is from God and was
written by men. He did not dictate to them as secretatries. He guided them in
their lives and gave them human gifts to record the message for us to read.
Unless you are Morman and believe that God wrote them down via angels on a golden
tablets which he did not leave behind for us to verify.
My Response:
Wow! “The Bible itself is from God and
was written by men.” [Perfect], you’re not far from the kingdom my friend. Now
if you’d just go back and read your paragraph again. This time replacing “golden
tablets” with the Anthanasian Creed’s “the
Son is God”.
Next Paragraph:
As to the source, God is our Source.
The information that comes from the many who have learned the original biblical
languages, studied the culture, worked thousands of hours to bring forth a
translation in English for me AND YOU to read. I was taught English by many
people in my past that taught me how to speak and read. Does God use all of
those people to help me see his Truth and communicate His Truth it to others?
Yes. However, if anyone claims to have a word from God it must be tested as to
its truthfulness. I do not know of ANYONE but Jehovah's Witnesses and
Unitarians that would agree with you and your message. They misrepresent many
of the teachings of the bible -- not just the doctrine of the nature of Jesus.
My Response:
John, you keep mentioning other
religions as being on the wrong side of your belief. How do you explain, better
yet interpret, Matthew 7:21-23? In its people are saying they prophesied,
casted out demons, and did many wonders in Yeshua’s name. Yeshua, in response,
said, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!” Are you
okay with that?
Next Paragraph:
This is my last post until you begin to
explain, and answer questions and enter into honest dialog. Whether your
acknowledge this or not, your thoughts and opinions that you claim from God are
dependent on “man’s interpretations” just like anyone else on this earth. This
is called dialog. You deflect the issue by pushing people to claim
"prophet" status. Your authority comes from your own self proclaimed
revelation from God. You challenge anyone when you are unable to provide an adequate
answer to say they are speaking on behalf of God. If you indeed claim you are a
prophet then keep using "thus saith the Lord" or "given to me by
the Spirit of God." Then let the People of God judge whether your message
defines you are a prophet of God or prophet of Satan. There is no middle ground
with the subject matter chosen.
Grace and Peace,
John
My response:
“Prophet of God or prophet of Satan”?
Wow!!
- "Now when they bring you
to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how
or what you should answer, or what you should say. For the Holy Spirit
will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say." Messiah Yeshua, Luke 12: 11-12 (NKJV)
God bless!!
In Love, In His Care...Jim
P.P.S
See A message (with the love of God attached) to John, February 25, 2014
P.P.S
See A message (with the love of God attached) to John, February 25, 2014
I read your book "Yeshua's God is God" as the snow fell today. I was not surprised by anything in your book. The teachings you present are nothing new, it is recycled Arian heresy from the 4th Century. The church examined Arius’ views and deemed them heretical and he was ex-communicated. There was much debate as to the nature of Christ back then and the decision was clear. On a positive note, later in life Arius eventually recanted his belief when the Council of Nicea (Nicean Creed in 381AD) made the distinction that "Christ was one in substance but a distinct person." Arius and his followers brought division in the church, reduced Christ to a demigod, re-introduced polytheism into Christianity since Christ was worshiped. Arianism today is found in Jehovah's Witness and Unitarianism – both groups you have very little in common except for your view of Jesus.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest concern is your use of "the spirit of God" telling you all these things. This is what cult leaders and heretics and apostles use as their "source". It leaves no room for discussion as to the merits of your argument. Your critique of Athanasius makes it seem as if came up with this creed on his own. He was a Pastor who reflected the church's creed from their view of the scriptures.
I believe the omission of the Lord Jesus is significant. The early Christians would not declare Caesar is Lord? Why not? They would go to their deaths because of this. They would only declare that Jesus is Lord. The Greek does not differentiate the word Lord except by context (Sir, Master/servant, Supreme King). Yahweh is the Lord of Israel in the Hebrew Scriptures. The title of Jesus is Lord is a divine title. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is an expression of Jesus’ divine nature.
Worship of anyone other than God is idolatry. Yet, if Jesus were not God, why would they worship him? Why would Jesus allow his disciples to worship him? If he was “less than God” then he would have strongly reprimanded them and used that as an opportunity to reveal his true nature. Yet, they worshipped him without a word of rebuke.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHello John,
ReplyDeleteI deleted my response to your comment because of a spelling error on my part. I typed the word "will" instead of the word while in a sentence. The sentence was meant to read: for the sake of the viewing audience, until you can place "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," while [Biblically] establishing He's God in the same sentence/paragraph, every comment [you] place on this blog will get (and this is love my friend) deleted concerning it.
I'm not interested in wasted time. What happened to others concerning their interpretations of the Scripture in the past has nothing to do with what God has placed in my care, today; we are living in the present (2014). I can safely say, everything concerning the events that took place in "381AD" has been passed down to us via, man.
The Spirit of God and the Spirit of God alone is the source of all [Biblical] truth.
The only thing different for those teaching/preaching [Yeshua's] gospel message then and now is, the scenery.
God bless.
In Love, In His Care...Jim
Jim,
ReplyDeleteI did just read your book regarding the "past" issues regarding Athanasius, and yet you are not interested in the "past". I was commenting on your topic and isue raised in your book. Yet, now it is irrelevant? Jesus was raised from the dead bodily 2000 years ago, and that is totally relevant today.
I'm not sure what you are saying in your opening paragraph, are you asking me to write and mean "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" then you will delete my comment????
The scripture is inspired by God and he used man to write them down. Are you saying that your book is equal to scripture? To say it is the "same" as scripture or that it agrees with scripture -- is for those of us reading your ideas.
Hope and Peace,
John
Greetings John,
ReplyDeleteGive me, the viewing audience, the [Biblical] evidence of Yeshua being God while using Saul's and Peter's "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" in your explanation/interpretation of it. "Please."
In Love, In His Care...Jim
John,
ReplyDeleteI'm going to delete your last comment. You have failed once again to hold up your end of the conversation. I'm going to give it to you again.
"Give me, the viewing audience, the [Biblical] evidence of Yeshua being God while using Saul's and Peter's 'Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ' in your explanation/interpretation of it". "please."
In regards to your last "deleted" comment, I'm all ears. Let [us], the viewing audience, [see] read your "[Biblical]" response. [You] are the one claiming Yeshua is God according to the Scriptures, aren't you? Here's your chance my friend. The Scriptures do say "Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering and teaching." 2 Timothy 4: 2 (NKJV) as given to [us] by the same Apostle Saul (called Paul) that gives [us] numerous times throughout the Scriptures "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ".
In Love, In His Care...Jim
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete"Give me the [Biblical] evidence of Yeshua being God while using Saul's and Peter's 'Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ' in your explanation/interpretation of it".
ReplyDeleteYour request to “give evidence of Jesus being God” using a portion of a verse is really limiting to the whole issue of the nature of Jesus. However, I will “do my part” as you say. Please note that, Saul of Damascus ceased calling himself “Saul” and referred to himself as Paul, as the apostle to the gentiles. I believe it to be inaccurate to identify Paul as “Saul”.
I choose to answer your request with a short and long explanation. The short one is to say that only a small amount can be learned from this one verse without leaning on the context of the letter (epistle) and the New Testament as a whole, and the cultural influences that effect its meaning.
Short
This command is urging its readers and listeners to Praise God, defined as the “Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” I do believe this verse clearly states that the Father of Jesus is God. Jesus is known elsewhere in the bible as the Son of God. This is a messianic title and also fits with the title “Lord Jesus Christ.”
It should be noted that this passage does not state that Jesus is also divine. Nor does the passage deny Christ’s divinity. We would need to look to the entire revelation of scripture to understand the nature of Christ.
Long
ReplyDeleteThe more expanded explanation of this verse that attempts to bring in New Testament understandings of the titles being referenced would include the following.
The introduction at the beginning of a apostolic letter by Paul and Peter are encouraging us to give Praise to God. They define God as Father and continue with “of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Simply, if we knew nothing else, we can understand that the authors are saying that the Father is God of our Lord Jesus Christ. The titles of “Father” and “Lord Jesus Christ” are filled with much meaning if you have ever read the bible.
The passage does not confirm nor deny that Jesus is God. It only affirms that Jesus is God’s Son or “the Son of God” as he is referred in other passages of the bible.
The meaning of Christ comes from the OT. God promised the ancient Israelites that “Messiah” (Mashiach from the Hebrew) would come to deliver them from sin. The idea of “Messiah” is carried to the NT with the title “Christ” (Kristos, from the greek). Literally Jesus Christ means “Jesus, the Annointed One.” Christians as they were later called by their enemies means “little anointed.” Jesus here is being called the Messiah, implying Savior, Redeemer of Israel. As a reminder, this cannot be understood solely from this introductory verse. Read the OT to see who is the Redeemer of Israel. Read the NT to see who is the Redeemer of Israel.
The word Lord (Kyrios in greek) must be understood by its context The word Lord potentially could mean: sir, master, or supreme king. So, which one is it? Can you just pick and choose as to which one is to your liking?
One context is “Sir”. Jesus in the Gospels is sometimes referenced as “Sir”. A title of respect, but similar to the way we would use “Mister.” Another possibility is “Master” as in servant/master.” Jesus is also called “Master” by the Gospels and by the Apostles in their letters as well. The third possibility is “Supreme King.” The early Christians faced a dilemma regarding the title of Caesar is Lord (Kyrios). They refused to call Caesar Lord. They could be executed for treason. They had no problem acknowledging Caesar as King (earthly king). However, to the early Christians, only Jesus is Lord.
Now, when the apostles write “Lord Jesus Christ” – the people who lived at that time understood the society and culture in which they lived. We however, do not automatically understand this just by reading the English words. So, we MUST look to history and context in order to understand the scriptures. The NT is the most helpful, and occasionally other sources help us understand the context as well. Ultimately, the Spirit of God must give us understanding. He may use the printed word and scholarship to make this known us.
My conclusion is that within this one passage we are unable to derive the context of the title Lord Jesus Christ without seeing how it is used in the remainder of the letter and the whole of the NT. We cannot see the richness of the title without further biblical revelation. We also cannot deny the divinity of Jesus from this passage alone as well. It simply states “the Father is Jesus’ God.”
John,
ReplyDeletePeter's and Saul's "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" agree with Yeshua's "My God," His God's, doctrine; can't make it any simpler than that.
Your response (once again) gives more reason for the 'viewing audience" to [doubt], [question], it/them; man, man, and more of man's interpretations of the Scriptures.
I'm going to give the "viewing audience" mine, again. Peter's and Saul's "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" agree with Yeshua's "My God," His God's doctrine.
By the way "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" is a greeting, and requires [zero] no context.
In Love, In His Care...Jim
In other words you have no response. I would appreciate a thoughtful response that comments specifically as to what is incorrect about my statements. To claim that Peter and Paul (not Saul) agrees with you is not much of an argument. Saying it does not make it so.
ReplyDeleteJohn,
ReplyDeleteI can safely say, Peter and Saul (called Paul) agree with Yeshua. I just so happen to agree with them, too.
John, I would highly recommend reading "I Invite [you] into "The Conversation (February 21, 2014)" on this blog.
In Love, In His Care...Jim
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJim,
ReplyDeleteIt is a bit crazy to say that you only use the NKJV and that you are only listening to the Spirit of God. Who translated the NKJV bible for you? ... Man. You claim that you do not "interpret" the bible and that you only listen to the Spirit of God. You are expressing your opinion about what YOU THINK the bible says, and you claim authority that the Spirit gave this to you. This is interpretation. This is the making of cult leadership.
John,
ReplyDeleteWhose opinions are you expressing?
In Love, In His Care...Jim
I repeat my question. Who translated the NKJV for you?
DeleteYou are the one making claims to special revelation from God based on an English translation. I rephrase in your own repetitious vernacular: Whose opinion of man do you rely on to read the NKJV?
John,
ReplyDeleteWhose your [source] my friend? You'll find mine in the post titled "As given to me by the Spirit of God," just posted (February 24, 2014, 9: 10am)
God bless!
In His Loving Care...Jim
John,
ReplyDelete"Almost 100% isn't good enough. Are you willing to place your "seal of approval," on it?
In Love, In His Care...Jim
To the viewing audience: I had to leave to make a (between) 11: 45-12-noon appointment. After posting my last comment I noticed certain comments were deleted; not by my doings; God's will be done and not mine.
ReplyDeleteNow, having returned from my meeting, I noticed just a few of the comments have been deleted. I don't have the time (now) to go into my e-mails to get what (in this case) John's comment said. I do save all comments. I'll have more time tomorrow, and I'll trust God in getting what needs to be put back, back where it/they belong.
Again! "God's will be done," and not mine.
In Love, In His Care...Jim
Turn the question around -- because there is a very late manuscript produced in the 16th Century AFTER vv 7,8 were NOT included in the Greek NT. The monks who wanted the two verses included only could point to the Latin Vulgate. These verses were a second generation translation and therefore were excluded in the Greek NT. When the monks produced a manuscript in Greek with the two verses (they created it themselves) it was reluctantly included. So, I'm okay with having the two verses "near by" and footnoted that these two vv were most likely added as to all other translations except for the KJV and NKJV. I"m certainly not going to lose any sleep over verses added by those who BELIEVED IN THE TRINITY so much they did want them excluded.
ReplyDelete100%. Apparently you are satisfied with 0.005% to include the verses. Certainly it is not a passage to make any major doctrinal points from.
John,
ReplyDeleteThe Spirit of God is the one reminding me of everything Yeshua said; just as Yeshua said He would; He'll continue to be/do so whether you believe it or not.
WHO/WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE MY FRIEND?
WHO/WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE MY FRIEND?
I'll help you; are you prepared to say the Spirit of God, or are you putting your trust in another; get to the bottom line my friend?
To the viewing audience: I will not answer another comment coming from John until he gives me, you, the answer to "WHO/WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE MY FRIEND?
John, the "free" billboard space is still available for you to use; feel free to do so. Don't expect any response from me until you answer the question. If you make an attempt to do so and you're found to be saying the same "as usual" thing, the next available space will be (unless another chooses to take it), yours.
John: If the Spirit of God doesn't need a conversation with the one trusting in man's interpretations of the [Scriptures], to get an understanding of them, why should I, [knowing] He dwells in me? If that sounds/looks familiar to you, it's because you've read it before, on page [50] in Yeshua's God is God. You did say you read the book. It has nothing to do with what version of the Bible a person uses. It has nothing to do with he said, she said, concerning a Biblical truth. You can go back in time as far as you want, if the Spirit of God is not the source of the information you're dishing out. I'm not interested in it; been there done that. You'll know the Spirit of God is the source when what you're reading/hearing lines up with Yeshua's (as given to Him by God), message; it's fail-proof. Without the Spirit of God leading the way, everything you've just read concerning Him will make no sense to you; that's a Biblical fact my friend.
In Love, In His Care...Jim
Jim,
ReplyDeleteI do not accept that you have heard from the Spirit of God in your message. Why, because your facts are incorrect, your answers are illogical, and it is a blatant form of coercion and manipulation. I know you think or believe you have heard something special from God, yet your position is not supported by the Scriptures.
Consider this, in the old testament, if a prophet claiming to be speaking from God, was incorrect about one part of his message he was to be stoned as a false prophet. This is how serious the issue really is.
I also do not accept your premise that I or anyone else must say "the Spirit of God" before stating a verifiable fact, an opinion, or an explanation. If it comes out of a man’s mouth via his brain then it is man’s opinion. Whether it is from the Spirit of God, that is to be tested by the veracity of the message amongst God’s community. By insisting upon this, you are urging people and yourself to take the Lord's name in vain. It is careless, and disrespectful to my Lord Jesus and His Father to invoke HIs name unless one is a prophet.
Not all visions, or voices or spirits or healings come from God. Many are deceived. Why does John write “do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” Do you know any Believers? If you do, ask them what they think of your message.
As far as your reference to “man’s interpretation” you use this to avoid dialog and communictation. When you cannot answer a question or that it goes against your opinion, you say that it is “man’s opinion” and that you agree with Yeshua and Paul and Peter. That is [zero] no value. It is a form of manipulation and undermines your credibility.
The Bible itself is from God and was written by men. He did not dictate to them as secretatries. He guided them in their lives and gave them human gifts to record the message for us to read. Unless you are Morman and believe that God wrote them down via angels on a golden tablets which he did not leave behind for us to verify.
As to the source, God is our Source. The information that comes from the many who have learned the original biblical languages, studied the culture, worked thousands of hours to bring forth a translation in English for me AND YOU to read. I was taught English by many people in my past that taught me how to speak and read. Does God use all of those people to help me see his Truth and communicate His Truth it to others? Yes. However, if anyone claims to have a word from God it must be tested as to its truthfulness. I do not know of ANYONE but Jehovah's Witnesses and Unitarians that would agree with you and your message. They misrepresent many of the teachings of the bible -- not just the doctrine of the nature of Jesus.
This is my last post until you begin to explain, and answer questions and enter into honest dialog. Whether your acknowledge this or not, your thoughts and opinions that you claim from God are dependent on “man’s interpretations” just like anyone else on this earth. This is called dialog. You deflect the issue by pushing people to claim "prophet" status. Your authority comes from your own self proclaimed revelation from God. You challenge anyone when you are unable to provide an adequate answer to say they are speaking on behalf of God. If you indeed claim you are a prophet then keep using "thus saith the Lord" or "given to me by the Spirit of God." Then let the People of God judge whether your message defines you are a prophet of God or prophet of Satan. There is no middle ground with the subject matter chosen.
Grace and Peace,
John
My response to John's latest comment will be found in the post titled A Message (with the love of God attached) to John (February 25, 2014 at 12: 17pm)
ReplyDeleteIn Love, In His Care...Jim