- This topic is empty.
- Posts
arius and mike have the same belief.
open the eyes of my heart LORD by hillsong.. listen to the song my friend.
Quote (jammin @ Dec. 18 2011,19:02) did i say two GODS mike??? mike i am waiting for your answer about phil 2:6. where did you find your words in phil 2:6?
Where did I say that YOU said “two GODS”?
Don't accuse me of things I didn't say. I was telling you what KATHI believes.And I'm in the process of addressing your Phil 2:6 question in the appropriate thread. We are not discussing that in THIS thread.
Quote (jammin @ Dec. 18 2011,19:12) arius and mike have the same belief.
And now just look. Even YOU now know the truth that there are THREE different possible translations of John 1:1c.
Pay attention to my current discussion with Charles. Maybe you will learn something.
(FYI, Arius was RIGHT.
)hahaha that is not the teachings of the apostles.
mike: And now just look. Even YOU now know the truth that there are THREE different possible translations of John 1:1c.me: i said ACCORDING TO PAGE 70.. hehehehe
you are not paying attention mike. according to 25 scholars and not mine. the word of GOD can be understand through the revelation of GOD
even if you study in bible school, if GOD will not show you the light, you will never understand what the bible says.i will accept GOD and not a god translation in john 1:1
most of the translation says GOD Quote (jammin @ Dec. 18 2011,20:16) according to 25 scholars and not mine.
“A god” is possible according to the actual Greek text, regardless of how many scholars actually choose to admit that fact.And “a god” makes sense of the sentence, because SOMETHING was WITH “THE God” in the beginning.
YOUR understanding says our ONE God was WITH our ONE God.
Can jammin be WITH jammin?MY understanding actually makes sense, because for one to be WITH another, there must be TWO. There is no other way.
Oh, and btw, it is EXACTLY the teaching of the Apostles. Not one of them ever taught that Jesus was God Almighty. Neither did Jesus himself.
thomas said my LORD and MY GOD. are u reading the bible mike???
or just making conclusions hahahahaha
i said GOD is nature. that's in phil 2.6
you and me have the same nature of MAN. how many time i have told you about this. this is elemantary stuff.. why dont you go back to elementary Quote (jammin @ Dec. 19 2011,18:29) thomas said my LORD and MY GOD.
And Paul called Satan “the GOD of this world”.Does that mean Satan is also a part of your trinity?
hahahaha.. why you compare satan to christ??? can you find a verse that satan called himself the son of GOD??? give me the verse. make sure if you compare christ, they should have the same characteristics. elementary stuff again.
My son has the same characteristics that I have. Does that mean he is ME?
Satan and Jesus are both spirit sons of God. In fact, all angels are sons of God. Why is Jesus the only son OF God that you think IS the God he is the Son OF?
(The ol' “Exception for Jesus Rule” again.
)Quote (jammin @ Dec. 19 2011 @ 18:48) can you find a verse that satan called himself the son of GOD
Nope. But I can show you a verse were Moses called Satan a son of God. And a verse where Satan called Jesus – not God – but the Son of God. And a verse where Jehovah called Satan a god. And a verse that says God is not man, nor a SON OF MAN.Interested in any of those?
mike:Satan and Jesus are both spirit sons of God.
comparing again satan to christ hahaha. christ has the form of GOD! read a verse that satan has the form GOD!now you admit that u cant read a verse where satan called himself the son of GOD. then do not compare satan to christ.
hahahaha. i suggest you read well my friend Quote (carmel @ Dec. 19 2011,00:51) Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 18 2011,03:37) Quote (carmel @ Dec. 18 2011,02:35) Quote The Hebrew/Aramaic has no equivalent to the Greek {εγω ειμι} ego eimi ? Edj,
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. 59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
The above scripture occurred 2000 years ago.
Whether Jesus spoke ,Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and God knows what,
(1)Definitely offended the Pharisees by pronouncing the words I AM, (2)which was the name of God for them, but for Jesus, the truth, either wasn't, or else confirmed that from then on it could be pronounced, since He came and fulfilled and sealed the OT.
WE AS CHRISTIANS ARE SUBJECT TO WHAT JESUS ESTABLISHED AND THE ONLY NAME WHICH GOD THE FATHER IS WELL PLEASED IN IS JESUS CHRIST.
Matthew 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily
WELL PLEASED IN, AND IN HIM ALL THE FULNESS DWELL.
INCLUDE HIS NAME AS WELL.
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi Charles,1) Could it be because he said he was before Abraham,
as in importance, not in any time-line scheme?
“Ye believe in God, believe also in me.” (John 14:1)2) They knew the name of God is [יהוה] YÄ-hä-vā,
as you too should know his name by now as well!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote Could it be because he said he was before Abraham,
as in importance, not in any time-line scheme?Edj,
That's your interpetation?
I downloaded The Passion.
And I noticed that Jesus said: “Eno no”. when they told Him that they are looking for Jesus of Nazaeth and He answered
I AM!I cheked it on answers.com
and it says that I am is either ena na, or eno no
How does it sound to you??
peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi CharleS,It sounds like you don't research things to far when you don't agree with them; is this correct?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi Charles,
May I ask the circumstances surrounding how you becoming a Christian?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgCharles
Quote Pierre, I am still waiting for your answer regarding the first born of every creature.
Now to this one!
Can't you see the diferrence between GOD and GOD you are my Son.??
Now read:
Luke 1:16 And he shall convert many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God
Do you have learn anything with Mike or T8 I have that same view as they have ,are going to go in the same thing s again
Pierre
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 19 2011,02:12) Quote (carmel @ Dec. 16 2011,12:53) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 16 2011,07:53) carmel,Dec. wrote:Mike I have posted this writing regarding your point.
I would mostly apprciate it if you were to comment .
Absolutely, Charles. There are many flaws in it, and many conclusions that are jumped to when the scriptures don't bear those conclusions out. I will take this piece apart with a fine toothed comb with you, but not just for my own enjoyment. I will do it ONLY if you are right there with me, learning along with me as we go. I will assume you are willing and will therefore begin.First up from the piece you quoted:
Some people ask how to understand John 1:1, since some sects claim that this verse should read that the Word was “a God”—or “a god.” This claim is based on the fact that in the original Greek text the word theos in the last clause of John 1:1 does not have the definite article as it does in the second clause, which refers to the Father.The bolded part above is completely true. The Greek words of John 1:1 say: in beginning was THE word and THE word was with THE god and god was THE word
You'll notice that THE word was not called “THE god”, but just “god”. Do you acknowledge that John 1:1 has one DEFINITE god (THE god), and one INDEFINITE god (god)? Do you acknowledge that the Word was NOT called “THE god”?(Charles, I won't move forward with this unless you DIRECTLY comment on each of these points as we go. I already know this stuff, so I am doing this for YOUR benefit. But it will be of no benefit to you unless you comment along with me as we go, showing me that you are understanding the stuff we are learning. So please address each bolded question or point I make.)
Continuing with the piece you quoted:
This argument is based on ignorance of Greek grammar and syntax. It is not true that John 1:1 could be translated: “and the Word was a God.” This translation is possible in a pagan Greek work, but utterly impossible in a Christian or Hebrew work. The reason is that the Bible teaches there is only one God.As for the words above, they are completely false. Firstly, the indefinite “god” is tranlsated as “a god” two other times in the NT. So unless they're calling the NT a “pagan Greek work”, they have spoken inaccurately.
Secondly, “Jesus is God” believers have been falsely claiming the Biblical belief in only one god for years, in an attempt to be able to say, “Well, Jesus is called “god”, and there is only ONE God mentioned in the Bible, so Jesus must be Him”.
The problem is that this is a complete fabrication. There are many other gods mentioned in the Bible. Satan was called a god by both Paul AND Jehovah Himself. Molech, Dagon, Chemosh, and Ashtoreth were also recognized by the Hebrews as gods. Not “false gods”, but “gods”. And Paul clearly tells us in 1 Cor 8 that there are “many who are called gods, both in heaven and on earth, as indeed there ARE many gods”. Was Paul lying? How about Jehovah when he called Satan a god? Was He lying?
Charles, do you acknowledge that the Bible speaks of MANY gods, both in heaven and on earth? YES or NO?
Okay, that should be enough for now. I have much more to say about the piece you qouted, but this will suffice for now. Charles, please DIRECTLY comment on all three of my bolded points. Only then will I go forward with the rest of the piece.
peace,
mikeQuote (carmel @ Dec. 16 2011,12:53) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 16 2011,07:53) Do you acknowledge that John 1:1 has one DEFINITE god (THE god), and one INDEFINITE god (god)? Do you acknowledge that the Word was NOT called “THE god”?
Mike,Yes
Thank you for your acknowledgment, Charles. John surely knew what he was writing. And John clearly taught us that the Word was “god”, or “a god”, who was WITH “THE God”. That clearly speaks of TWO, one of whom was WITH the other in the beginning.Quote (carmel @ Dec. 16 2011,12:53) But how are we to distinguish between the “WORD” AS A PERSON, AND THE FATHER AS ANOTHER ?? Since they are in the same sentence.
I don't understand. If I say, “Mike was WITH Charles”, I am speaking of TWO persons in one sentence, one of whom was WITH the other. It is the same in John 1:1.Quote (carmel @ Dec. 16 2011,12:53) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 16 2011,07:53) Charles, do you acknowledge that the Bible speaks of MANY gods, both in heaven and on earth? YES or NO? Yes
Okay. Then that is the first of many things the information you posted is wrong about. Their claim is basically, “It can't be 'a god', because there is only ONE god in scripture.” And we both know that is an inaccurate statement, right? So now you can start to see how these “Jesus is God” believers are twisting the scriptural truth to force their doctrine to fit. If Jesus was truly God Himself, then the scriptures ought to bear that out all by themselves. There is no need to fabricate things to force the point, right?Quote (carmel @ Dec. 16 2011,12:53) But you are referring to the Old Testament. Many times I quoted that the Old Testament is fulfilled by Jesus, and also that it is a complete confusion. We as Christians are more subject to the New testament since Jesus is the truth,and fulfilled and sealed the OT once and for all.
That argument isn't accurate, as we still need both Old and New Testaments to gain the truth of scriptures. Also, your argument doesn't erase the fact that Satan was called “the god of this world” in the NT. And it doesn't erase the fact that Paul said “as indeed there ARE many gods i
n heaven and on earth” in the NT.So far, the scorecard for the info you posted is:
1. One correct statement: TWO gods are mentioned in 1:1, but only ONE of those two are called “THE god”. The Word is NOT that one.
2. One incorrect statement: There is only ONE god in the whole of scripture. We both know that is NOT the truth.
I will move on to the rest of the info you posted in my next post.
peace,
mikeQuote I don't understand. If I say, “Mike was WITH Charles”, I am speaking of TWO persons in one sentence, one of whom was WITH the other. It is the same in John 1:1. Mike,
What is it that you always, compare GOD with us humans, and in the same, you deny that Jesus is God in flesh??
The word WITH , has at least eight definitions in our language, which is the right one in the example you gave??
For a start, I am not with you regarding Jesus deity.
Now since unless you be more specific, and I cannot understand what exactly you meant, I wonder what is the right definition when it is referring to God.
Scriptures say: All with Him. Can you define how???
Scriptures say: John 17:5 and now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
In the above there are three with can you determine the right definition for each???
Scriptures say: all things are possible with God.” Explain how???
But it is definitely a mystery to us. Mike!
We can never pretend to be certain and accurate through our language to define the spiritual world, never mind God.
Quote So now you can start to see how these “Jesus is God” believers are twisting the scriptural truth to force their doctrine to fit. If Jesus was truly God Himself, then the scriptures ought to bear that out all by themselves. There is no need to fabricate things to force the point, right? No Mike,
The scriptural truth, is clear enough about the “JESUS IS GOD” it is not fabrication.
Luke 10:22 no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.
So Mike ,unless Jesus will reveal it to you ,you will never see the truth regarding Jesus deity, especially since you are more concerned in the human wisdom, and not in God!!
Quote That argument isn't accurate, as we still need both Old and New Testaments to gain the truth of scriptures Mike, I don't agree that the truth is gained only if we use both the OT and the NT.
Through that statement you are saying that Jesus died for nothing, and He is not the truth, also you are concluding that Jesus didn’t do a complete mission, and never established the truth. Something which Jesus confirmed in
John 17:4………… I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
Mike, I told you that the OT is a complete confusion, and since it is so, it is not a reliable source to verify whether the NT is the truth or not.
On its own is sufficient.
Paul himself said that His old belief is DUNG to acquire the truth of Jesus.
WE are discussing John 1:1 and according to Jesus we shouldn't put new wine in old wine skins and vice versa for the simple reason that we ruin the new wine. OK Mike.
Like the Watchtower are doing, through their own corrupted scripture in order to please their belief especially regarding the deity of Jesus.
This is FABRICATION MIKE!!
1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
So Myself I am convinced that the truth is in the NT only since Jesus is the truth and He established the NT.
Quote 1. One correct statement: TWO gods are mentioned in 1:1, but only ONE of those two are called “THE god”. The Word is NOT that one. TWO GODS?? With respect to the sentence yes but when it comes to definition two persons, or entities, in ONE GOD.
Is that why the Watchtower added the a and altered it to become “the word was a God”
Mike don’t fabricate things!!
The NWT are fabricating that the word was not God.
Quote There is only ONE god in the whole of scripture. We both know that is NOT the truth. You see Mike when you involve the OT .You will ruin the truth.
The NT is clear that there is ONE GOD , but as soon as you combine it with the OT, all the confusions there are in it would automatically pass onto the NT.
Satan, is not god, but the god of the earth so the title must include of the earth which means that he will end like the earth, therefore he is not god, but a mortal god. therefore there is only ONE GOD in the NT. Jesus Christ our saviour God1John 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
It says clear enough here.
peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 20 2011,17:13) Charles Quote Pierre, I am still waiting for your answer regarding the first born of every creature.
Now to this one!
Can't you see the diferrence between GOD and GOD you are my Son.??
Now read:
Luke 1:16 And he shall convert many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God
Do you have learn anything with Mike or T8 I have that same view as they have ,are going to go in the same thing s again
Pierre
Pierre,I am still waiting for your answer regarding the first born of every creature.
Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 20 2011,15:30) Quote (carmel @ Dec. 19 2011,00:51) Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 18 2011,03:37) Quote (carmel @ Dec. 18 2011,02:35) Quote The Hebrew/Aramaic has no equivalent to the Greek {εγω ειμι} ego eimi ? Edj,
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. 59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
The above scripture occurred 2000 years ago.
Whether Jesus spoke ,Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and God knows what,
(1)Definitely offended the Pharisees by pronouncing the words I AM, (2)which was the name of God for them, but for Jesus, the truth, either wasn't, or else confirmed that from then on it could be pronounced, since He came and fulfilled and sealed the OT.
WE AS CHRISTIANS ARE SUBJECT TO WHAT JESUS ESTABLISHED AND THE ONLY NAME WHICH GOD THE FATHER IS WELL PLEASED IN IS JESUS CHRIST.
Matthew 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily
WELL PLEASED IN, AND IN HIM ALL THE FULNESS DWELL.
INCLUDE HIS NAME AS WELL.
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi Charles,1) Could it be because he said he was before Abraham,
as in importance, not in any time-line scheme?
“Ye believe in God, believe also in me.” (John 14:1)2) They knew the name of God is [יהוה] YÄ-hä-vā,
as you too should know his name by now as well!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote Could it be because he said he was before Abraham,
as in importance, not in any time-line scheme?Edj,
That's your interpetation?
I downloaded The Passion.
And I noticed that Jesus said: “Eno no”. when they told Him that they are looking for Jesus of Nazaeth and He answered
I AM!I cheked it on answers.com
and it says that I am is either ena na, or eno no
How does it sound to you??
peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi CharleS,It sounds like you don't research things to far when you don't agree with them; is this correct?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote It sounds like you don't research things to far when you don't agree with them; is this correct? Edj,
I respect your conclusion
peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 20 2011,17:05) Hi Charles, May I ask the circumstances surrounding how you becoming a Christian?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote May I ask the circumstances surrounding how you becoming a Christian? I was born again through the internet while browsing
How about you???
peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (carmel @ Dec. 20 2011,13:45) This is FABRICATION MIKE!! 1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
Hi Charles,We are just sticking to the facts here, right? And you have already agreed that the FACT of the matter is that there are THREE valid possibilities for John 1:1c:
1. THE God
2. A god
3. god in a qualitative sense, such as “and the Word was divine”.You cannot now backtrack on what you've already agreed to and say the NWT is “fabricating things”, when it is a known FACT that “a god” IS a possible translation.
Quote (carmel @ Dec. 20 2011,13:45) TWO GODS?? With respect to the sentence yes but when it comes to definition two persons, or entities, in ONE GOD.
Now HERE is the REAL “fabrication”. There is no possible way to conclude “two persons in one God” from the words John wrote. The FACT of the matter is that John writes of two “THEOS”, one of whom was WITH the other, and only one of whom was called “THE theos”. That translates into English as “TWO GODS”, not “two persons in one God”.Quote (carmel @ Dec. 20 2011,13:45) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) There is only ONE god in the whole of scripture. We both know that is NOT the truth. You see Mike when you involve the OT .You will ruin the truth.
Really? Involving what the NT writers themselves called “God-breathed scripture” is ruining the truth?Your source is wrong, Charles. They try to persuade gullible people that if there is only ONE called “god” in the whole of scripture, Jesus must be that god. They are wrong, and even the NT proves it. Don't forget that it was Paul who said “there are MANY gods in heaven and on earth”.
Quote (carmel @ Dec. 20 2011,13:45) 1John 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. It says clear enough here.
Get a new translation, Charles. The word “God” is nowhere in that scripture. In fact, the KJV, which you quoted, even adds brackets around [of God] to let you know they are adding their own words. Try these translations:NET ©
We have come to know love by this: that Jesus laid down his life for us; thus we ought to lay down our lives for our fellow Christians.NIV ©
This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers.NASB ©
We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.NLT ©
We know what real love is because Christ gave up his life for us. And so we also ought to give up our lives for our Christian brothers and sisters.MSG ©
This is how we've come to understand and experience love: Christ sacrificed his life for us. This is why we ought to live sacrificially for our fellow believers, and not just be out for ourselves.BBE ©
In this we see what love is, because he gave his life for us; and it is right for us to give our lives for the brothers.NRSV ©
We know love by this, that he laid down his life for us—and we ought to lay down our lives for one another.NKJV ©
By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us. And we also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.I await your response to my analysis of your source's next paragraph. Because there is no need to discuss the first two paragraphs further. We have already BOTH agreed that “a god” IS a possible translation of 1:1c. And we've already agreed that there are many who are called “god” in the scriptures.
Time to move FORWARD with the discussion instead of wallowing in things already discussed and agreed upon.
peace,
mikeQuote (jammin @ Dec. 19 2011,19:02) now you admit that u cant read a verse where satan called himself the son of GOD.
Oh, it has to be Satan himself calling himself a son of God? You won't take Moses' word for it?Hmmmmm……..where did Jesus himself ever call himself “God”?
Quote (carmel @ Dec. 21 2011,13:53) Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 20 2011,17:13) Charles Quote Pierre, I am still waiting for your answer regarding the first born of every creature.
Now to this one!
Can't you see the diferrence between GOD and GOD you are my Son.??
Now read:
Luke 1:16 And he shall convert many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God
Do you have learn anything with Mike or T8 I have that same view as they have ,are going to go in the same thing s again
Pierre
Pierre,I am still waiting for your answer regarding the first born of every creature.
CharlesQuote
Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 16 2011,05:21)
Quote (carmel @ Dec. 16 2011,08:02)
Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 15 2011,08:18)
Quote (carmel @ Dec. 15 2011,08:04)
Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 14 2011,17:41)
CharlesYou ask me how many creatures their are below the first one right ?
Pierre
Pierre,
Just give a random sensible number any will do, this simply to start our discussion and the I will answer according to what you answer.
This is to proove how wrong all those who change a simple word like creature into creation,which although it seems the same in fact it's not,for the simple reason that when we use the first born of every creature it gives more light regarding the spirit of Jesus'function in creation.
charles
ok; 3
Pierre
Quote
ok; 3Now since you stated: the firstborn over all creation :
Where out of that 3 is Jesus.
Since we all know that God the Father created ALL in Jesus spirit, ALL by Jesus spirit,and ALL for Jesus spirit.
NOW CONCENTRATE before you post because ALL THOSE THREE ( WHICH REPRESENT ALL THE CREATION)must be created in that definition.
I mean All in Him,ALL by Him,and ALL for Him
Charles
charles
Christ is not in those three,because it says OVER not IN
Pierre
Quote
Christ is not in those three,because it says OVER not INPierre,
IN HIM All the fulness dwell.
What it the meaning of ALL??
Read:
Colossians 115Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
[/B]
charles
Quote
Pierre,IN HIM All the fulness dwell.
What it the meaning of ALL??
if some thing is in some thing that some thing that have the things on the inside is obviously out side of it ,right ??
all the candies in the jar ,it does not say that the jar is a candy ,right ?
Pierre
————–
PRthis was my answer
Pierre
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
