"great teacher" and "YHWH" are not synonymous.

anyway,

inasmuch as i may use archaic akkadian
words provided i gave some indication of
what they meant in 'english' if they
weren't 'english' already,

i can use any indigenous utterence without
suggesting that a local people's private
understanding of -that- particular utterence
is the ideation which i am seeking to elicit,

much the same way as when the Apostle Paul
approached the pedestal; "to the unknown God"
which was in Athens in a place called
"the areopagous" [see the whole bit 'acts 17']

----------
Acts 17:23
for as I was passing through and considering
the objects of your worship, I even found an
altar with this inscription: TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.
Therefore, the One whom you worship without
knowing, Him I proclaim to you:
-----------

he's basically agreeing with them that they
knew they didn't know something and proceeds
to tell them what he knows about what
they don't know.

and so, i can use "Wahiguru' in a figure
which speaks of YHWH and -not- be suggesting
to anyone that some indigenous population's
private understanding of "Wahiguru" -is-
identically YHWH.

and so, the next set of
statements does just that.

speaks of "Wahiguru" as generic
"great teacher" and not as
God of Punjabi Province.

as it is not fully demonstrated
that the God of Punjabi Province,
is, in fact, YHWH.

the bit follows;

"Wahiguru" is to YHWH in,
somewhat, the same manner as

"President" is to "George Washington"

only, in the case if YHWH

it would be as if George Washington
created the office of "President" to
wear one of the hats that George Washington
as person may wear, and so, George Washington
precedes and supercedes "President"

and so, calling yourself "President"
doesn't make you George Washington.

while in, being George Washington,
you can be viewed, as institutor of
the Presidency and, as the President.

so, while YHWH may, in fact
be a great teacher, one could
call themself a great teacher
and not be YHWH.


for instance;

it can be stated that YHWH created
"The Annointed" as an 'office'

and even placed other beings in,
and allowed other beings to hold,
that 'office'

with an intention of taking
that 'office' to YHWH.

and one may say this without ever
implying that YHWH ceases to become
'everlasting' -when- YHWH steps into
the 'office' of "The Annointed" which
may be viewed as an 'inception'

God invented "Christ" first for
an Angelic host and then for man.

no such 'office' is necessary for God alone.

God -is- what the 'office' accomplishes.

now, you can say that "Christ" came
into being when God invented it,

*but* you cannot say that God who
*is* Christ is invented when God
steps into that Office.


like, YHWH creates the Sabbath -for-
man, but does -not- become a created
being when YHWH is "Lord of the Sabbath"
thru, the Son of man, Jesus.


Jesus is Son of Adam and Son of God.

whether "Son" came into being the moment
Jesus took on the flesh is irrelevant to
whether "Son" has existed from all
time and before time.

if "Son of God" was never *called*
'Son' before this, that does not negate
'Son's' pre-existance in the Godhead.

just as I've made quite plain[in years past]
[yes, we're still making analogous examples]
with the bit about Titles and my own created
Title as Chief Constable of the Baskervilles.

I invented the Title, the office
and the duties of that office.

I did not become the Chief Constable
until i entered into that office,

*but* I was not born yesterday.

-i- can place another person into that office.
In that case, the office brings a defining
element to the person who now holds the office,
but when -i- take the office that -i- created
for myself -i- define the office.

i say to -that- person; "carry out these
duties of this office in such a manner"

but when -i- take the office to myself,

i need only be myself, who has an existance
before the existance of the office itself.


Man was created and man is being offered
up a bunch of things from God, and YHWH
is taking the flesh to his own.

*not* thru some lesser emissary but
thru his very own indestructible life.


now, we just tell you that the apparent
duality of Mind and Word or Spirit and Word
has always existed as the constituent
make-up of the Godhead.

that is, for 'them' you can't tell 'them' apart.

human beings are prone to mistruth which
makes one's mind and word non-identical.

God -can not- lie because
God's Word -is- God's Mind.

-they- are One

i've blabbed on "Spirit and Word" on
several occasions and maybe i will again.

etc.