JOHN 1:1

This topic contains 2,699 replies, has 55 voices, and was last updated by  NickHassan 2 years, 8 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #53314
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 70,242

    Quote (942767 @ May 28 2007,02:51)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 27 2007,19:40)
    Hi 94
    You say
    “John 1      
    1:1
    In the beginning was the Word (Logos, from Strong's Concordance: “embodies a conception or idea” and the Word(Logos) was with God(these two parts of the verse just indicate that God had and idea or a plan), and the Word was God(and whatever the idea, it was Theos (God)).”

    So you scripture base is Strongs?


    Hi Nick:

    No, I don't base my understanding solely on Strong's but on what the whole of the scriptures say to me, but sometimes we need to know what a word means in order to understand what God is saying through a scripture.

    God Bless


    Hi 94,
    Any concordance only reflects how the translators have translated the manuscripts. They are not dictionaries or lexicons. Strongs has no basis for making such statements as it can show NO occasion when the word LOGOS is translated in the KJV in that way. Thus it reflects prejudice and I suggest should be ignored on this matter.

    #53316
     942767 
    Participant
    • Topics started 13
    • Total replies 7,574

    Quote (Not3in1 @ May 28 2007,07:38)
    Prophesy – yes!  Did the spirit son have a name?  Where does the OT tells us what his name is?  Can we see that his name was the “Word” or the “Logos” before he was born?

    Isaiah talks a lot about how God's arm “will” bring about salvation, as if the arm is not yet existent.  It talks about the tender shoot “growing up before him” – did the spirit son “grow up” or was he already an adult?  The OT is full of predictions that we “will” see the salvation of the Lord…..not that salvation is already working for us……….it was yet to come…..the prediction of a Son coming into the world!


    HiNot3in1 and Nick:

    I agree and as to his name this is what the scripture states:

    9:6
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and HIS NAME SHALL BE CALLED Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    Notice that the scripture says HIS NAME SHALL BE CALLED.  Prophetic?  I believe that this indicates, yes.

    God Bless

    #53318
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    Any concordance only reflects how the translators have translated the manuscripts. They are not dictionaries or lexicons.
    *****************
    Ah. Thanks for pointing this out.

    #53319
     942767 
    Participant
    • Topics started 13
    • Total replies 7,574

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 28 2007,07:49)

    Quote (942767 @ May 28 2007,02:51)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 27 2007,19:40)
    Hi 94
    You say
    “John 1      
    1:1
    In the beginning was the Word (Logos, from Strong's Concordance: “embodies a conception or idea” and the Word(Logos) was with God(these two parts of the verse just indicate that God had and idea or a plan), and the Word was God(and whatever the idea, it was Theos (God)).”

    So you scripture base is Strongs?


    Hi Nick:

    No, I don't base my understanding solely on Strong's but on what the whole of the scriptures say to me, but sometimes we need to know what a word means in order to understand what God is saying through a scripture.

    God Bless


    Hi 94,
     Any concordance only reflects how the translators have translated the manuscripts. They are not dictionaries or lexicons. Strongs has no basis for making such statements as it can show NO occasion when the word LOGOS is translated in the KJV in that way. Thus it reflects prejudice and I suggest should be ignored on this matter.


    Hi Nick:

    Sorry Nick, I believe that Strong's concordance has helped me in several circumstances to understand what is being said by the scriptures, and also, translators make mistakes especially since they are biased towards the “trinity doctrine” which you also do not believe, and so what I have stated is what I believe the scripture indicates.

    God Bless

    #53322
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 70,242

    Hi not3,
    Scripture shows Christ can be seen from two perspectives.

    Rom 1
    ” 1Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

    2(Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)

    3Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

    4And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:”

    #53323
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    There is only one way to see Jesus and that is as the only [conceived and born] Son of God.

    Jesus was “promised” this is true.  God promised Abrahma that his offspring (seed/conceived children) would be as many as the sands.  Jesus is the promised child of God.

    Was Jesus only God's Son *after* the resurrection?

    #53332
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 70,242

    Hi not3,
    Rom 1 says “was proven to be” so it is a confirmation of prophecy. He is the one not allowed to rot prophesisied by David and confirmed to be the HOLY ONE.

    Acts 2
    25For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:

    26Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:

    27Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

    28Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.

    29Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.

    30Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

    31He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

    32This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

    33Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

    34For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

    35Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

    36Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

    #53800
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (942767 @ May 28 2007,03:22)
    Hi WJ:

    Quote
    So it was both the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his blood and his claiming to come
    down from heaven that offended them and was hard for them to recieve!

    I agree with you about this it was the whole deal about first him coming down from heaven and the also about eating his flesh and blood.  And so, we are in agreement on this point.

    But let me just ask you the following questions.  Did the body of Jesus exist before before he was born of the Virgin Mary?  And if we are saying “the body of Jesus”.  Who then is Jesus?

    Let's resolve this first and then if you have other points that I haven't addressed restate them and I will address them.

    God Bless


    94

    No I don’t think we agree. Are you saying that Jesus meant we eat physically of his flesh and drink his blood?

    While physically Jesus Body and blood was the atonement for our sins, when Jesus ate the last supper with them the wine and the bread was a type of his broken body and his shed blood which he said this do in remembrance of me.

    The Bread from heaven is a “spiritual” bread, which are the words that he “The Word” spoke.

    Jn 6:35
    And Jesus said unto them, *I am the bread of life*: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

    Jesus said he is the bread and coming to him would mean you never hunger!

    How?

    Jn 6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; *the flesh profiteth nothing*: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

    He is trying to tell them he is not literally speaking of his body and blood, but his “words of life”, for they are Spirit and life.

    Peter got it, “thou hast the words of eternal life”.

    This is not about his physical Body. So his natural birth is not even pertinent to Jesus coming down from heaven or returning back to where he was.

    In this whole incident Jesus is trying to raise their sights to see that *he came from heaven*, and that he had the “Words of Eternal life”, because he is the Eternal life that was with the Father. 1 Jn 1:1,2.

    Jesus the Word was Spirit before he took on the likeness of sinful flesh.

    He is the “Word, the Spirit and the Life! Jn 1:1, Rev 19:13, Jn 7:37, 2 Cor 3:17. Jn 14:6.

    So I reiterate…

    1 Cor 15:45
    And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit.

    Notice the brackets for “was made”. Added by the translators.

    Look at this verse in its context and a better rendering of the verse would be…

    1 Cor 15: YLT
    45 so also it hath been written, `The first man Adam became a living creature,' the *last Adam is for a life-giving spirit*,
    46 but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual.
    47 The first man is out of the earth, earthy; *the second man is the Lord out of heaven*;

    Jesus is and was the Eternal life that was with the Father, 1 Jn 1:1,2, and he is the Lord from heaven!

    94! Based on my previous post, do you believe the translators or the Apostle John with over 40 pronouns ascribed to Jesus in Jn 1, did not believe in the pre-existent of Christ?

    And by what basis would you change the translations to reflect such?

    Also based on Col 1:16, and 17 and the above I Cor 15:45-47, do you believe the Apostle Paul believed Jesus was just a thought or plan before he took on the likeness of sinful flesh?

    ???

    Blessings

    #53802
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    94

    You say…

    Quote

    But let me just ask you the following questions.  Did the body of Jesus exist before before he was born of the Virgin Mary?  And if we are saying “the body of Jesus”.  Who then is Jesus?


    There are many Hebrew scriptures that show Christ appeared to many before he came in the flesh.

    Dan 3:25 just one example…

    He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

    I encourage you to listen to some of these messages with open heart!

    http://www.eadshome.com/Jesuslessons.htm

    Blessings

    :)

    #53805
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 70,242

    Hi W,
    KJV has stepped off the path here if you check the other versions-look at Young's Literal drawn from the same manuscripts!
    YLT
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'

    nasb
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'

    niv
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'

    esv
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'

    #53816
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 28 2007,18:22)
    I encourage you to listen to some of these messages with open heart!

    http://www.eadshome.com/Jesuslessons.htm


    WJ, I visited this site and have a question:
    It says that there were many who “saw” the LORD, but who did they really see?  The site says that they didn't really see God because you cannot see God.  So they say it was Jesus……..

    Was it Jesus that Adam and Eve saw and spoke with in the garden?

    #53817
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 28 2007,18:43)
    Hi W,
    KJV has stepped off the path here if you check the other versions-look at Young's Literal drawn from the same manuscripts!
    YLT
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'

    nasb
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'

    niv
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'

    esv
    25He answered and hath said, `Lo, I am seeing four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the appearance of the fourth [is] like to a son of the gods.'


    NH

    No you have walked off the path!

    So who do you think the fourth was?

    ???

    #53819
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 70,242

    Hi W,
    Are we allowed to “think” things and that is good enough evidence we have found truth?
    You should rather abide in scripture.
    that is the prescribed path.

    #53820
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (Not3in1 @ May 29 2007,06:21)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 28 2007,18:22)
    I encourage you to listen to some of these messages with open heart!

    http://www.eadshome.com/Jesuslessons.htm


    WJ, I visited this site and have a question:
    It says that there were many who “saw” the LORD, but who did they really see?  The site says that they didn't really see God because you cannot see God.  So they say it was Jesus……..

    Was it Jesus that Adam and Eve saw and spoke with in the garden?


    not3

    The same one who created them!

    Gen 1:
    1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    26 And God said, *Let us* make man in *our image, after our likeness*:…
    27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

    Man is him and yet man is them.

    God is him and yet God is us!

    :)

    #53821
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    Nick, thanks for pointing out that other versions can either justify our claims or they can shut them down. We see what we want to see, sometimes. We see what we pray is there….. I am guilty of this as well. We all have various glasses that we put on from time to time. Each version, it seems, has it's own unique set of translators on board. How else could some scriptures be seen as Jesus is God and others say no such thing?

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 2,700 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2018 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account