Did Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ) Say: I AM NOT GOOD and I AM NOT GOD?

The short, but very substantial, story of the Wealthy Young Ruler.

Now this subject is yet another of those ‘pain in the neck’ subjects that blaspheming Judaisers and satanic gnat strainers, alike, try to spiritually garrote me with, but, I hasten to add, they always fail. So let’s copy and paste here the Holy Scriptures that they then pollute with their perverted reasoning and satanic Judaising nonsense:

Matthew 19:16-17 (KJV) And, behold, one came and said unto Him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have Eternal Life? 17 And He said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Mark 10:17-18 (KJV) And when He was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to Him, and asked Him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit Eternal Life? 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

Luke 18:18-19 (KJV) And a certain ruler asked Him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit Eternal Life? 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

Now the first issue that these mongrel dogs will attempt to make mileage out of is the monotheism BS value that they think these verses possess. They think these verses PROVE that God is ONE and that Yashua Messiah was clearly stating that He was was not God, but is this TRUE? NO a thousand times NO!!! But hang on Yashua Messiah said: “none is good, save one, that is, God.” So how do you get around that, I hear you say? Quite easily is the answer to that and it all depends upon your understanding of the word ‘GOD’ in the New Testament.

However, in order to understand the word ‘God’ in the New Testament we have to understand the word ‘God’ in the Old Testament FIRST, for the Godhead never changes. We also have the issue of the Greek language of the New Testament, for it is too vague in its description of God, unlike the Hebrew definition of the Old Testament. Therefore from Strong’s Concordance we get this:

God – H430
אלהים – elohym – el-o-heem – Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God[head]; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: – angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty. (Square brackets mine)

god – H433
אלהּ אלוהּ
‘ĕlôahh ‘ĕlôahh – el-o’-ah, el-o’-ah (The second form is rare); probably prolonged (emphatically) from H410; a deity or the deity: – god. See H430.

This ‘eloah’ singular deity would be used when describing Satan, who is the only solitary god (‘eloah’) of this world.

So from this proof we now know for sure that the Godhead is two distinct Spiritual beings, not one, other than their being number one with none above.

Moreover, if we now move onto The New Testament we have a Greek word being used for the word ‘God’ and not a Hebrew word. However, does that mean the nature of the Godhead changes? Do they become a different Godhead just because a new word is in use? No way, so what gives? The word ‘theos’ is what gives instead of ‘eloheem’ or ‘elohim’ but the plural nature of the Godhead remains the same. From Strong’s Concordance once more:

God – G2316
θεός – theos – theh’-os – Of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding, God, god [-ly, -ward].

In ancient Greece there were only ‘gods’ ‘plural’ because the Greeks were polytheists and worshipped many gods, not two alone. However, there was no need for a singular Greek word for a god because there was no singular god in polytheistic Greek worship. This means the Greek word ‘theos’ did the job just fine when describing the true Duality Godhead = more than one!!

Matthew 1:23 (KJV) Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. (Emphasis mine)

OK, so here we can plainly see that Yashua Messiah is described as being: “God with us”, that is, in the flesh so, in turn, the Old Testament plural Duality Godhead ‘Elohim’ is also still with us with The Father in heaven and The Son on earth in the flesh and, therefore, still Two God’s.

So this brings us to our little conundrum of: “there is none good but one, that is, God:”

Now what was Yashua Messiah actually saying here? For we know for sure that He wasn’t saying God is one; He certainly wasn’t saying He wasn’t God and He certainly wasn’t saying He wasn’t good either, even though most will mistakenly think He was saying that. So what was He really saying? Well, first of all, He was telling us plainly, and those there present, that He was God in the flesh as part of the Godhead, but without them realising it. This is due to The Truth that the Godhead is a Duality Godhead and always was a Duality Godhead with Him now standing there amongst them as God, so how could He say that He was not good or tell His questioner not to call Him good? What was Yashua Messiah doing by saying that?

The answer to that my friends is very simple. This unsaved and lost wealthy young ruler was trying to win favour with Yashua Messiah by calling Him good. This was plain and simple flattery which got him nowhere with Yashua Messiah who quickly rebuked him with the question: Why callest thou me good? This was nothing to do with Yashua Messiah not being good. Of course He was good, He was God in the flesh so He had to be good – He could be nothing else.

However, just for the benefit of the wealthy young ruler He adds these two riders: “There is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP The Commandments.”

Now, as already shown, Yashua Messiah was God in the flesh so was stating clearly that He was good, but without anyone there realising it and yet at the same time giving Glory to His Father in heaven as being good as the other half of the Godhead.

With the second rider we have Yashua Messiah saying: “But if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP The Commandments.” In J B Phillips’ translation he has it better: “But if you WANT TO enter into [that] Life you must KEEP The Commandments.”

So first things first. Yashua Messiah is saying: “If you WANT TO enter into Life? So does this wealthy young ruler want to or not? Furthermore, where is The Law in this arrangement? It’s nowhere in it at all, so clearly Yashua Messiah is teaching the wealthy young ruler that this is about a FREE CONSCIOUS DECISION on his part and not a commandment issue = no Law. Second, we have this word ‘KEEP’ which everyone, and his dog, mistakenly thinks means OBEY when it mean what it says, that is, to keep – to protect – to hold onto as precious – internalised and have them written on our hearts so NOTHING to do with obedience at all. (Please see my article “When Did The Biblical Word KEEP Become OBEY?” – Link below.)

This is what Yashua Messiah was REALLY saying to the wealthy young man that came forward gushing and fawning all over Yashua Messiah in his initial, over the top, flattering enthusiasm.

Now don’t get me wrong on this, for later on I believe that this young man WAS saved. How do I know this? Easy, because Yashua Messiah loved him, so that means He knew the young man’s heart deep down and knew he was sincere. He also knew The Father was calling him, and KNEW that eventually he would repent and love his neighbour by giving up his wealth and then FOLLOWING Yashua Messiah. The same, in a different way, applied to Nicodemus but I won’t go into that subject now.

Furthermore we then have the issue of the wealthy young ruler’s question: “What good thing shall I DO, that I may have Eternal Life?” OK, I have made my point quite obvious here by emphasising the words ‘I DO’. Moreover, so what could this young man DO in order to inherit Eternal Life? NOTHING! absolutely nothing is the answer to that question. How do we know that? Quite simply because he was asking the question within the backdrop of the Ten Commandments of which he boasted in being a fautless observer. This means he was asking Yashua Messiah what other Commandment he should be observing or doing that he may have missed. His mission in questioning Yashua Messiah was solely Law based and understandably so because The Law was still in force at that time, even for the faithful.

However, The Lord then stuns him with His reply which immediately introduces the SPIRITUAL DIMENSION or SPIRITUAL THRUST of The Commandments = LOVE!! Not the feeble letter of The Law of The Commandments = legalistic Pharisaism and its close companion hypocrisy.

So the wealthy young ruler is challenged with Yashua Messiah’s charge to go sell all his possessions and give the proceeds to those in need and THEN to follow Him. Now mark this point and mark it well for the gifting of his wealth will not save him, but the act of gifting his wealth will prove that he is being called by The Father to Yashua Messiah and also prove that he is saved. Salvation is ALWAYS an undeserved free gift and our good works will follow as a result or as evidence that we are saved, not because we are trying to be saved or trying to earn our salvation.

Finally,Yashua Messiah in saying these tough things to the wealthy young ruler was in turn challenging his commitment to Him. Was he prepared to give up his Law/Commandment based life and comfortable wealthy lifestyle and put his sole trust and faith in Him? These are the points and questions that Yashua Messiah was getting across to the wealthy young ruler.

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/when-did-the-biblical-word-keep-become-obey/

The DUALITY YAHHEAD (Godhead)

The Duality Yahhead!? What Yahhead is that, I hear you ask? Well I’ll tell you straight, right away, They are not a mickey mouse triune yahhead (godhead), They’re not a Christadelphian/Unitarian/Judaic/Islamic monotheistic godhead and They are not a Binatarian yahhead (godhead) either, if that’s what you were thinking.

Now what is a Binatarian yahhead (godhead)? I’ve never heard of such a thing, again I hear you say. OK, so let me explain, a Binatarian yahhead (godhead) is a half-truth, so that means it’s a lie, just like the monotheistic mono-god and the trinity triune yahhead (godhead).

Binatarianism is belief in a Duality Yahhead (Godhead) that has been corrupted with Triunism and turned into yet another lying hu-man magical construct. This means that instead of a mythical yahhead (godhead) that is one in three and three in one, they have constructed a yahhead (godhead) that, like the trinity, it is one in two and two in one = total fallacious religious nonsense.

We therefore need to understand that The Yahhead consists of TWO DISTINCT Spiritual Beings who are and were NEVER at anytime one solitary spiritual being – a mono distinction that applies solely to The Adversary – The Serpent Creature, for he is the ONLY MONO-GOD. This means that The Duality Yahhead is very simple to understand, for we are told about Them right at the beginning in Genesis Chapter 1 verse 1

Genesis 1:1 (MCV) In the beginning Yah (H430 Elohim – plural) created the heaven and the earth.

There They are, in the very first verse of the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures: The ‘ELOHIM’, and the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’ is the plural of the Hebrew word ‘Eloah’ or ‘Eloha’. So if the Yahhead was ONE YAH, it would have read: “In the beginning Yah (Eloah – singular) created the heaven and the earth.” But it DOES NOT SAY THAT it says Yah ‘ELOHIM’ – PLURAL! MORE THAN ONE GOD – THE YAHHEAD, but NOT a triune yahhead! Please excuse the all-caps shouting folks, but shouting is very necessary at times, especially, for some stiff necked duped rebellious people out there who love to hang onto their nonsensical Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious myths, whether it be monotheist myths or triune myths.

From Strong’s Concordance:

God – H430 אלהים – ‘ĕlôhı̂ym el-o-heem’ – Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: – angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

Now pay attention to what Strong is doing here, for he is following a satanic monotheistic agenda and explaining away The Truth by introducing his own irrelevant intellectual nonsense into his definition of ‘Elohim’ – “but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God;”

Moreover, ignoring his intellectual waffle, ask yourself this very pertinent question: Would a Bible scholar of Strong’s immense calibre, with his excellent knowledge of the Hebrew language, have not known of the word ‘Eloah’ or ‘Eloha’ and known its SINGULAR meaning, and also have known that ‘Elohim’ was the plural of that singular word? I will leave you all to answer that no brainer question for yourselves. (Take note, I have recently learned that Strong was a Freemason so great care MUST be employed when using his concordance for a certain agenda will be at work therein.)

OK, so we have established from the first verse of the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures that the Yahhead is more than one Yah and this is further confirmed for us in Genesis again:

Genesis 1:26 (MCV) (first part) And Yah (H430 Elohim – plural) said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness: (Emphasis mine)

Right, now is this erroneously claimed solitary mono-god speaking to himself? If not, who is he speaking to – the angels? No way, for I’ll tell you straight, the angels never created anything, and man is definitely not created in the image of angels. This means that if we take the “Yah is one” nonsense, seriously, it must mean that their yah needs certifying, for he is hallucinating and seeing someone in his head that he is now attempting to hold a conversation with. Hilarious or what!?

Having said all that, I can now see all the monotheists jumping up and down, frothing at the mouth, and renting their clothes in true Moloch and Baal worshipping style, as they did in Elijah’s day, when their mono-god failed to bring down fire to ignite the wet wood around their altar, such is their delusional thinking. (See 1 Kings 18) However, not only that, but when I have finished this article the trinity dupes will no doubt have joined them in their manic heathen frenzy. Who said being a follower of Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ) – The Way was not good fun? LOL

Moving on, I will now quote a segment from one of my earlier articles which covers the prime and/or premier “identity of Yah verse in Deuteronomy”, and we all know it, don’t we? This verse is the verse that nearly all monotheists quote in an attempt to support their erroneous satanic claims:

Deuteronomy 6:4 (KJV) Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

Deuteronomy 6:4 (MCV) Hear, O Israel: The Yahavah our Yah is one Yahavah:

Please note, as I dissect this verse it will be, in part, a repeat of what I have said above.

“Hear, O Israel” – or better translated “Hear you Israel” or “Listen up you Israelites”, for I, your Yahavah, have something important to tell you:

“The Lord our Yah” – properly translated from the Hebrew; The Yahavah (The Lord) = The Eternal or The Self-Existing. Our Yah = Our God – Our ‘Elohim’ (plural); the Yahhead that has always self-existed before time began and was/is always a plural Duality Yahhead.

Straight away in this short phrase of Set Apart (Holy) Scripture we are told by the use of this word ‘Elohim’ (the plural of ‘Eloah’) that we are dealing with more than one Yah. Look folks, there is no getting away from this Truth, and we need to get it through our heads that the Hebrew word ‘Eloah’ (singular) would have been in use here, not ‘Elohim’, IF Yah was one. OK, so we have now ascertained that The Yahhead is more than one, and yet it says:

“Is One Yahavah (Lord)” – so what’s going on here and what does this mean? The Hebrew word here for ‘one’ is ‘Echad’ which means ‘united’ or ‘in unity’ in one sense, and ‘number one’ the prime number in the other sense, that is, no one higher or no one above – The Most High as written elsewhere in the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures.

One – H259 – אחד – ‘echâd ekh-awd’ – A numeral from H258; properly united, that is, (as) one; or (as an ordinal) first: – a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any (-thing), apiece, a certain [dai-] ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.

OK, as we can see the word ONE does not mean solitary or one yah or a mono-yah, for it means UNITED AS ONE, that is, in agreement in thought, word and deed, yet still distinct and separate as Two Spiritual Beings.

A Numeral – H258 אחד – ‘âchad aw-khad’ Perhaps a primitive root; to unify, that is, (figuratively) collect (one’s thoughts): – go one way or other.

The primitive root word then confirms this for us – TO UNIFY!! And again this, in turn, means They are not one being, for being united or unified is always an arrangement whereby a number of beings are at one with each other or unanimous in their thoughts, aims and ideals, as in a football team. Newcastle United is a team of individuals united in one aim – to win, but they are not one being, they are eleven distinct beings. This is how it is with the Godhead; they are Two Spiritual Beings, united as one in thought, mind and deed – totally likeminded – united!

This, too, is why The Yahavah, through Paul, exhorts the Congregations of Yah to be like the Yahhead in their relationships one with another:

Romans 15:5-6 (MCV) Now the Yah of Patience and Comforting grant you to be likeminded and/or of a mutually agreeable mindset, one toward another according to Messiah Yashua: 6 That ye may be united with one mind and one mouth Glorify Yah, even The Father of our Yahavah Yashua Messiah.

Take note, the Congregations of Yah were not ONE BEING, but they were exhorted by Paul to be of ONE MIND just like The Father and The Son and like the Yahhead of Yah with Yah in the beginning who said: “Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness:”

 

If we now move on to the New Testament we have a new word for the Yahhead and that word is the Greek word ‘Theos’ instead of the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’. However we need to be clear that just because a Greek word is now used, instead of a Hebrew word, doesn’t mean that the nature, character and make-up of the Duality Yahhead has changed. In fact the Greek word ‘theos’ is very useful for this topic for, generally, it means a DEITY and in the Greek sense that automatically means gods plural, for the Greeks were polytheists – they, like the ancient Egyptians, had many gods. As far as I know they did not have a word in their language to describe a monotheistic god. It was only the Canaanite Serpent Seed Jews that worshipped such a deity and they worshipped that deity in error, and in ignorance, when they knew very well that Yah ‘Elohim’ was a plural Yahhead.

Yah (God) – G2316 – θεός theos theh’-os – Of uncertain affinity; a (polytheistic) deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding, God, god [-ly, ward].

So there we have it: ‘Theos’ = a polytheistic deity and in Ancient Greece that would mean more than one god, not a mono-god. Not only that, but because ‘Theos’ is such a general all encompassing word in terms of objects of worship, it means it can be interpreted any way you like, if you have a monotheistic or triune agenda to fulfil. Moreover, notice, that within this very definition we can see Strong doing just that with all his figurative nonsense regarding ‘magistrates’. With regard to ‘magistrates’ I will leave a link below for additional reading regarding this satanic subject.

Here is some interesting backup information from this web page: https://goedbericht.nl/english/god-placer/

“Based on the previous blog, I received a question, How do you come to the definition of the Greek word “theos” (God) as PLACER? The well-known Lexicon to the New Testament of Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, says the following:

The most probable derivation is from the verb theo, to place (see tithemi, Str. 5087). The heathen thought the gods were disposers (theteres, placers) and formers of all things.

The Keyword Concordance of the Concordant Literal New Testament presents the same origin of theos. The verb appoint or place we also recognize in our word thesis, which is a proposition (anti-thesis = contrast, synthesis = composition). Below are some passages where the word theos is remarkable combined with tithemi, from which it was derived.

Romans 4:17 … A father of many nations have I appointed you – facing which, he believes it of the GOD … 1 Corinthians 12:18 Yet now GOD placed the members, each one of them, in the body according as He wills. 1 Corinthians 12:2…whom also GOD, indeed, placed in the ecclesia, first, apostl… 1Thessalonians 5:9 for GOD did not appoint us to indignation…”

The Greek word theos is much more concrete than our word Yah (God). Theos refers to One Who appoints everything and gives it a place. Nothing takes place without Him giving it a place.”

Furthermore, because we know that The Yahhead does not cause confusion re their identity we can definitely know for sure that plural ‘Theos’ in the NT means exactly the same as plural ‘Elohim’ in the OT – The Duality Yahhead with The Set Apart Exclusive Spirit as their LIVING POWER.

One last Scripture:

Galatians 3:20 (MCV) Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but Yah is one.

Now does this verse make any sense? First of all, who is The Mediator that this verse is referring to? Answer: Yashua Messiah. And was Yashua Messiah Yah come in the flesh? Answer: Yes, hence it states quite plainly that a mediator is not of one, so there has to be more than one in order for one to mediate to the other and yet it then says: “Yah is one!” So what’s going on here?

Easy, Yah = ‘Theos’ = ‘Elohim’ = more than one, for the Yahhead does not change:

Malachi 3:6 (MCV) For I am The YAHAVAH, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Here below we have Yashua Messiah speaking on behalf of the Yahhead for He tells no one has ever seen or heard The Father:

John 1:18 (MCV) No man hath seen Yah (The Father) at any time; The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of The Father, He hath declared Him.

John 5:37 (MCV) And The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. YE HAVE NEITHER HEARD HIS VOICE AT ANY TIME, NOR SEEN HIS SHAPE.

So there it is folks, NO ONE has ever seen or heard The Father at any time, so that must mean that Yashua Messiah was The Yah of the Old Testament who spoke on behalf of Himself and/or The Father – The Duality Yahhead. (See link Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 below).

In Yashua Messiah’s name,

Messenger Charles

1. Exposing the Trinity Lie!:  https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/exposing-the-trinity-lie-part-1/

2. Are Trinity Worshippers Anti-Christs?: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/are-trinity-worshippers-anti-christs/

3. Can Christians Grieve The Holy Spirit?: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/can-christians-grieve-the-holy-spirit/

4. Can Christians Lie to The Holy Spirit?: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/2016/04/28/ananias-and-sapphira-how-we-can-know-this-is-a-false-or-a-fake-story/

5. Matthew 28:19 Is a Spurious Verse and Baptism is Not Into The Trinity: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/should-christians-be-baptised-into-yashua-messiahs-the-lord-jesus-christs-name-alone-part-1/

6. The Satanic Curse of Monotheism – Is God ONE? – Part 1:

The Satanic Curse of Monotheism – Is God ONE? – Part 1

7. Was and Is Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) God?:

Was, and Is, Yashua Messiah (The Lord Jesus Christ), God?