- This topic has 3,215 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Paladin @ Oct. 13 2011,06:01) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 04 2011,12:18) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 03 2011,08:50) Irene……….Get it God and his words are one and the SAME, Yes Just as your words are with You so GOD'S words are with him and Yes even in the “BEGINNING was those words of His with Him Just as your words are with YOU there is no difference GOD'S word are with him also.
Gene,ANYTHING that can be said to be WITH you cannot possibly BE you. That is just simple common sense, dude. ESPECIALLY when that thing is described with a masculine, personal pronoun like “HE”. Is the Word of God a “HE” that was both WITH God AND God?
Mike, you really desparately need to study a little more about Greek pronouns and definite articles.God is called both “he” and “it”.[page 41, post 4]
God is also depicted both with and without the definite article.
You are making a lot of clains you cannot substantiate from the Greek.
John 13:3 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; Is theou the same God as ton theon?
Luke 20:37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord [ton theon]the God of Abraham, and the [theon]God of Isaac, and the [theon] God of Jacob.
Does Abraham worship a different God [“ton theon”] than his son Isaac worships [theon] or his grandson Jacob [theon]?
I don't see where God is said to be WITH God in your scriptures, Paladin. What say you actually address the POINT I made to Gene instead of diverting away from it?Paladin, do you know of any case in human history where a particular BEING was ever said to be WITH itself? YES or NO?
Quote (Paladin @ Oct. 13 2011,06:24) Mike – One God or two? Luke 20:37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord [ton theon]the God of Abraham, and the [theon]God of Isaac, and the [theon] God of Jacob.
One God, or two?
John 13:3 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; [theou][ton theon]
In both cases: ONE God.Which one of those scriptures speak of God being WITH God?
Kerwin, this is becoming a maze of diversions.
NETNotes says: The perfect tense in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated.
Your source says: ……..the progress of the action has reached its culmination and the finished results are now in existence……
And the sample sentences your source offered were: I have learned the material in the previous lesson. (I still know the material.)
She has made a cake for dessert. (The cake is now available to be served.)
The grass has grown tall. (It is still tall and needs to be mowed.)
Everything we've both posted has pointed to the same thing: The perfect tense of “ktizo” in Col 1:16 refers to things that have ALREADY BEEN created, the results of which are now in existence. ie: All things in heaven and earth have ALREADY BEEN created through Jesus, and are STILL created.
It cannot possibly refer to a new heaven and a new earth – which have yet to be created.
Do you acknowledge this FACT of the matter yet?
Also, I await your answer to this question:
Kerwin, does the phrase “Maker of all things” in Eccl 5 refer to God being the Maker of ONLY knowedge?Quote (Paladin @ Oct. 13 2011,06:09) “Poiew” has a lot of meanings that have nothing to do with creation…….. To say the age was created through God's son misses the meaning of Heb 1:2. It is a reference to the age of Judaism fading [being ended] from the scene, and the age of Christianity being introduced to the scene.
The ages were not created in the way creation was made from nothing. The ages were introduced, fulfilled their rightful place in God's plan, then faded, to be replaced by introduction of the next age in God's scheme of things.
Paladin, anybody can put any spin on any scripture at any time. For example, this is YOUR spin on Col 1:15-16:Firstborn of every creature really doesn't mean “firstborn of every creature”.
ALL things doesn't really mean “ALL things”.
Created doesn't really mean “created”.
Therefore, it is teaching that Jesus has been appointed as overseer of every creature, and CERTAIN things in heaven and earth moved down a notch in authority when Jesus was exalted.
It is like when Kangaroo Jack told me about some obscure Greek secular writing where “monogenes” referred to a “liver”. So now, all of a sudden, “monogenes” no longer refers “only begotten”.
So you use the possibility that “poieo” and “ktizo” could mean this or that to refute the pre-existence of Jesus. But you are so overwhelmed by the rest of the scriptures that it isn't even funny. Because to keep your doctrine, you have invented a Word that WAS actually the BEING of God Himself while he was also WITH the God he WAS, but then somehow stopped BEING God when he became flesh, and for some reason, had the glory as of the only begotten OF God when he became flesh. And the fact that JESUS is the ONLY “only begotten of God” has somehow eluded you.
That's why I wanted to do the “ONE POINT AT A TIME” debate with you a while back. Because if we could start with our list on the “Pre-existent Database” thread, and go through these 50+ scriptures one at a time, it would be easy to see how wrong you guys are. But both you and Kerwin have opted NOT to debate this thing in a one point at a time manner. I wish one of you would do it though – so you could see that your answer to every pre-existent scripture is always some obscure, alternate definition that the Greek word could mean.
Example:
The dog was lying in the grass and kept barking.Well Mike, “dog” is used to refer to people these days, and “lying in the grass” could refer to that person smoking weed and telling lies, and “barking” could refer to that person yelling. So instead of the OBVIOUS meaning of this sentence, it really means some pot-head was yelling out lies at people.
This is how you must do things to support your flawed doctrine, Paladin. And I know that if I could get one of you to take each point individually, the oddball alternate meanings you've come up with will add up to a joke that even YOU can see when you look at all of them together.
Can we not just take the words as they are written?
Can't “all things” really MEAN “all things”? Can't “created” really MEAN “created”? Can't the Word of God, who we know is Jesus from Revelation, be the one who was with God in the beginning, but then became flesh and had the glory of the only begotten Son that he truly IS? Can't we be smart enough to realize the Being of God could never be WITH the Being of God? Mike,
Quote NETNotes says: The perfect tense in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated. Do really believe the writers of Net notes do not know the difference between an English simple past and an English perfect past?
Here is the difference:
Quote Use the Simple Past to express the idea that an action started and finished at a specific time in the past. Sometimes, the speaker may not actually mention the specific time, but they do have one specific time in mind. Quote The Past Perfect expresses the idea that something occurred before another action in the past. It can also show that something happened before a specific time in the past. Both the above definitions are from different pages of englishpage.com. I have linked to the page on the past perfect previously in this conversation and plan to include the link to the page on the simple past in a note at the bottom of this page.
Quote Everything we've both posted has pointed to the same thing: The perfect tense of “ktizo” in Col 1:16 refers to things that have ALREADY BEEN created, the results of which are now in existence. ie: All things in heaven and earth have ALREADY BEEN created through Jesus, and are STILL created. So it is clear that the act of creating the collective in Colossians 1:16 and of framing the ages in Hebrews 11:3 did not necessarily start and finish at a specific time in the past; which according to Course II Lesson 3 of ntgreek.net is shown with an aorist tense verb and not a perfect tense. I do agree that a past perfect in English can mean that the act of creating and framing occurred previously to the time the words of each specific passage was written down, either in a continuous or non-continuous sense, and the results of that action are now in existence. That I have written before. I do not agree that is the only possibility as from the example “the grass has grown tall” it is clear that the grass is not done growing and will continue to grow taller if it is not cut.
Quote It cannot possibly refer to a new heaven and a new earth – which have yet to be created. Why not, as the grass has continued to grow even though it had already grown tall?
Never the less, it is but one action that delivered the collective creation and the effects of that one act is that the collective creature will be delivered from its bondage to corruption just as it was enslaved by one act.
Just consider the old creation as a type as scripture instruct us that it was finished in just seven days and yet Jesus teaches us in John 5:17 that the effects of that one act is that God was still working on his creation on the day he spoke and we can look around and observe that God is still at work as he continues to change his creations to counter the works of Satan and for other reasons. Likewise the new creation was finished by one act and the effect of that act is that Jesus is currently in heaven doing his work on his creation to this day to counter the works of the evil one and thereby fulfill the righteous plan of his Father and our Father.
Quote Also, I await your answer to this question: Kerwin, does the phrase “Maker of all things” in Eccl 5 refer to God being the Maker of ONLY knowledge?
I have nothing to add to what I have previously wrote on that matter nor do I wish to go into more conversations than I have time to handle and still act in accordance with the love of God.
Note: My source for the definition of an English simple past is here.
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 15 2011,14:02) I do not agree that is the only possibility as from the example “the grass has grown tall” it is clear that the grass is not done growing and will continue to grow taller if it is not cut.
Ahhhh………….but it COULD BE done growing forever. We don't KNOW from the fact that the grass DID grow that it will CONTINUE TO grow, do we? “Years ago, before this became a DESERT, the grass had grown tall here”.The perfect tense speaks NOTHING of the action STILL BEING completed as we speak, does it Kerwin? It speaks of a PAST, ONCE FOR ALL TIME action, the finished results of which are ALREADY in existence. This is the culmination of BOTH of our sources, Kerwin.
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 15 2011,14:02) Just consider the old creation as a type as scripture instruct us that it was finished in just seven days and yet Jesus teaches us in John 5:17 that the effects of that one act is that God was still working on his creation on the day he spoke and we can look around and observe that God is still at work as he continues to change his creations
Wrong. When scripture says God CREATED in six days, the creation being spoken of was DONE within that six days. The fact that God continues to create up until this day does not change the phrase “God CREATED” into a future tense.For example, if on day 8 God created more things, then those are NEW things and NOT therefore included in the things that already HAD BEEN created on day 6.
Kerwin, you can't logically take a sentence that says “Mike finished the race” and then start speculating about whether or not Mike is still running races to this day. The words mean that the ONE race mentioned was COMPLETED in a once for all time manner.
And when it says all things in heaven and on earth, visible and visible, WERE CREATED through Jesus, it doesn't speak of things that might LATER be created through Jesus. It speaks of ALL THINGS up until the time that Paul wrote those words. And according to your source, it means “the progress of the action has reached its culmination and the finished results are now in existence“. And THAT includes the sun, moon, stars, angels who had by that time existed, and human beings who by that time had existed. And although NEW things will undoubtedly continue to be created by God through His Son, Col 1:16 speaks nothing about those things. Because of the perfect tense, we KNOW it MUST refer to – NOT the things TO BE created through Jesus in the future – but to the things that had ALREADY BEEN COMPLETELY created through Jesus at the time Paul wrote those words.
Kerwin, I'm done with this discussion. What I've just posted is UNDENIABLE FACT, and you continuing to make long posts about the perfect tense is unnecessary.
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 15 2011,14:02) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Also, I await your answer to this question: Kerwin, does the phrase “Maker of all things” in Eccl 5 refer to God being the Maker of ONLY knowledge?
I have nothing to add to what I have previously wrote on that matter nor do I wish to go into more conversations than I have time to handle and still act in accordance with the love of God.
I want a simple YES or NO answer, Kerwin. Surely that shouldn't take too much time out of your life, right? Perhaps you could answer my question DIRECTLY, without your normal TIME CONSUMING additional fluff and diversions, since you are short of time.
Mike
kerwin is an out baler when he does see what is not going to his way he quits ,
he suddenly find himself busy and has no time left ,his truth within his miss understanding that is what he likes ,it fits according to Kerwin.
Pierre,
The reason I'm anxious for Kerwin's answer about Eccl 11 is because I already have two or three more scriptures waiting for him.
He is trying his best to say the “all things” that came from God in 1 Cor 8:6 doesn't really mean “ALL things”. And the only reason he has to make this claim is because if the all things that came FROM God literally means ALL things, (which it does), then that is the same “all things” that also came THROUGH Jesus in 1 Cor 8:6.
He knows this is the end result, but doesn't want to accept it. And so he claimed that “all things” refers only to the things included in the “internally consistent teaching” of 1 Cor 8 as a whole………ie: “knowledge”.
So I've listed many scriptures that don't have the act of creation as the “internally consistent teaching” of the chapter as a whole, but in which the words “Maker of all things” still refers to God making ALL things.
He is now at an empasse with Eccl 11:5, because he knows in his heart of hearts that Solomon was NOT saying God was the Maker ONLY of “knowledge”.
So, if he admits what he knows to be the truth, and acknowledges that “Maker of all things” in Eccl 11:5 means that God literally made ALL things – despite the fact that the teaching of Eccl 11 as a whole doesn't revolve around the act of creation, then I have made my point about 1 Cor 8:6.
If he does NOT acknowledge this fact, then I have a couple more scriptures waiting for him.
Eventually, he will have to do one of two things: 1)Stick his head in the sand, or 2)Accept that the same literal “ALL things” that came FROM God in 1 Cor 8:6 also came THROUGH Jesus.
peace,
mikeMike………….Go read the Hebrew because there is no such word as CREATE in the original Hebrew language, it is in HEBREW, “fatting or filling as in filling up, And where it says in English He “created” them , it should be better written creating them is He in his image It should be presented as a ongoing event not a past “completed” event. Another words GOD is creating us into His Image , it is a ongoing process of creation or filling us to that image, not a past completed event. Jesus is the first from Mankind to acquire the “FULL” goal GOD has in mind for us all. Jesus is simple the first of many brethren in that plan of GOD. IMO
peace and love……………………………………….gene
Mike
Ge 19:12 The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here,
Ge 19:13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.”
Ge 19:14 So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were pledged to marry his daughters. He said, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the LORD is about to destroy the city!” But his sons-in-law thought he was joking.
Ge 19:15 With the coming of dawn, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Hurry! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away when the city is punished.”Lk 17:28 “It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building.
Lk 17:29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.many will wake up late
Pierre
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 16 2011,07:02) Mike, Quote NETNotes says: The perfect tense in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated. Do really believe the writers of Net notes do not know the difference between an English simple past and an English perfect past?
Here is the difference:
Quote Use the Simple Past to express the idea that an action started and finished at a specific time in the past. Sometimes, the speaker may not actually mention the specific time, but they do have one specific time in mind. Quote The Past Perfect expresses the idea that something occurred before another action in the past. It can also show that something happened before a specific time in the past. Both the above definitions are from different pages of englishpage.com. I have linked to the page on the past perfect previously in this conversation and plan to include the link to the page on the simple past in a note at the bottom of this page.
Quote Everything we've both posted has pointed to the same thing: The perfect tense of “ktizo” in Col 1:16 refers to things that have ALREADY BEEN created, the results of which are now in existence. ie: All things in heaven and earth have ALREADY BEEN created through Jesus, and are STILL created. So it is clear that the act of creating the collective in Colossians 1:16 and of framing the ages in Hebrews 11:3 did not necessarily start and finish at a specific time in the past; which according to Course II Lesson 3 of ntgreek.net is shown with an aorist tense verb and not a perfect tense. I do agree that a past perfect in English can mean that the act of creating and framing occurred previously to the time the words of each specific passage was written down, either in a continuous or non-continuous sense, and the results of that action are now in existence. That I have written before. I do not agree that is the only possibility as from the example “the grass has grown tall” it is clear that the grass is not done growing and will continue to grow taller if it is not cut.
Quote It cannot possibly refer to a new heaven and a new earth – which have yet to be created. Why not, as the grass has continued to grow even though it had already grown tall?
Never the less, it is but one action that delivered the collective creation and the effects of that one act is that the collective creature will be delivered from its bondage to corruption just as it was enslaved by one act.
Just consider the old creation as a type as scripture instruct us that it was finished in just seven days and yet Jesus teaches us in John 5:17 that the effects of that one act is that God was still working on his creation on the day he spoke and we can look around and observe that God is still at work as he continues to change his creations to counter the works of Satan and for other reasons. Likewise the new creation was finished by one act and the effect of that act is that Jesus is currently in heaven doing his work on his creation to this day to counter the works of the evil one and thereby fulfill the righteous plan of his Father and our Father.
Quote Also, I await your answer to this question: Kerwin, does the phrase “Maker of all things” in Eccl 5 refer to God being the Maker of ONLY knowledge?
I have nothing to add to what I have previously wrote on that matter nor do I wish to go into more conversations than I have time to handle and still act in accordance with the love of God.
Note: My source for the definition of an English simple past is here.
Kerwin………….You have it right it is a ongoing event , creation is an ongoing event and continues to this very day, it all is operating to fulfill the plan and “WILL” of GOD. God is creating us into the exact image of His dear son, through his Spirits. He is forming our thinking and changing our heart to emulate Him just as He did in and for Jesus.peace and love……………………………….gene
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 16 2011,09:17) many will wake up late
No matter how hard you and I try to wake them up on time.Mike,
Quote Ahhhh………….but it COULD BE done growing forever. We don't KNOW from the fact that the grass DID grow that it will CONTINUE TO grow, do we? “Years ago, before this became a DESERT, the grass had grown tall here”. Here is the example of an English perfect.
Quote The grass has grown tall.
It is still tall and needs to be mowed.Quote Here is an example of a pluperfect tense is called a past perfect in English The grass had grown tall.
It was tall and needed to be mowed at some time in the past, after previously having grown tall.
So according to ntgreek.net it is not a pluperfect because the Greek spelling I obtained from biblos.com does not have the “el” characteristic. That is a surprise as I like you thought it would be a past perfect.
Quote Because there are only 21 verbs in the New Testament that occur as pluperfect active indicatives, we can list them here. Notice that the characteristic ει is seen without exception, even in the 2nd pluperfect forms. In the 3rd person singular forms, this may look like the personal ending of the Present Active Indicative. It is not. Remember that the pluperfect is a secondary tense, and therefore has secondary personal endings, for which there is no 3rd person ending. The ει seen in the 3rd person singular forms are the coupler letters of the pluperfect active forms with no personal ending attached. Englishpage.com teaches me a lesson that informs me that both the Apostolic and Interlinear Bibles translate it to a present perfect continuous.
That correction changed the path of my part of the conversation as I plan on considering the following information from englishpage.com.
Quote We use the Present Perfect Continuous to show that something started in the past and has continued up until now. “For five minutes,” “for two weeks,” and “since Tuesday” are all durations which can be used with the Present Perfect Continuous. Quote You can also use the Present Perfect Continuous WITHOUT a duration such as “for two weeks.” Without the duration, the tense has a more general meaning of “lately.” We often use the words “lately” or “recently” to emphasize this meaning Quote Kerwin, I'm done with this discussion. What I've just posted is UNDENIABLE FACT, and you continuing to make long posts about the perfect tense is unnecessary. You obviously are mouthing presumptuous nonsense as you gave no sign you realized that the second use of “ktizo” in Colossians 1:16 was a Present Perfect Continuous; and neither did I as I just learned it. Learning is why I find these conversations beneficial. Perhaps you should use these conversations in the same way if you do not already.
Quote I want a simple YES or NO answer, Kerwin. Surely that shouldn't take too much time out of your life, right? Perhaps you could answer my question DIRECTLY, without your normal TIME CONSUMING additional fluff and diversions, since you are short of time. I find a repetitive conversation boring as it does not go anywhere and serves no real purpose. I wrote what I wrote and have discovered nothing new.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 17 2011,14:31) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 16 2011,09:17) many will wake up late
No matter how hard you and I try to wake them up on time. yeahQuote (kerwin @ Oct. 16 2011,16:20)
Here is the example of an English perfect.Quote The grass has grown tall.
It is still tall and needs to be mowed.
And here is another example of the same:
ALL OF THE grass has grown tall. It is STILL tall.Kerwin, does this tell us that only CERTAIN parts of the grass has grown tall? Or does it tell us that ALL of the grass has grown tall? Does it tell us that the grass is still growing taller as we speak? NO! It speaks of the PAST ACTION of the grass growing tall, and it speaks of the fact that the grass is STILL tall, but it DOESN'T speak of the grass CONTINUING to grow taller. Surely you notice the PAST TENSE word “grown” in that sentence, right?
With Col 1:16, “everything has been created through Jesus” speaks of the PAST ACTION of things being created through Jesus. The use of the word “has” versus “had” speaks of those things STILL being a part of creation. But it DEFINITELY DOESN'T speak of things STILL being created through Jesus.
I checked your Apostolic and Interlinear links, neither of which say what you claim they say. The Apostolic doesn't show which form the word is in from what I can tell, but renders it into English as “have been created”. And the interlinear lists the form as “perfect passive indicative”, and also renders it into English as “have been created”. If either of them considered it a “present perfect continuous”, they would have rendered it as “all things have been BEING created through Jesus” and not “have BEEN created through Jesus”.
But like I said before, none of this really matters. I realize you are grasping at straws to keep your flawed doctrine alive; but there is nothing you can do to change the fact that ALL THINGS had ALREADY BEEN created through Jesus by the time Paul wrote 1:16.
So call it continuous, pluperfect, or whatever you want – it STILL refers to ALL THINGS that had ever existed up until the point Paul wrote Col 1:16 having BEEN created through Jesus. The possibility that things are STILL BEING created through Jesus does NOT change the fact that all things up until that point had also ALREADY BEEN created through Jesus.
Do you understand this, Kerwin? The continuous action does NOT change the past action and never will.
So, “ALL THINGS”, including Adam, the Garden of Eden, Moses, the dinosaurs, the angels, etc, had ALREADY BEEN created through Jesus at the time Paul wrote Col 1:16.
You want it to say “all things ARE CURRENTLY BEING created through Jesus”, but it simply does NOT say that. If it did, don't you think that some scholar would have figured that out by now? Don't you think we'd have at least one Bible with “are currently being created” in Col 1:16?
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 16 2011,16:20)
You obviously are mouthing presumptuous nonsense as you gave no sign you realized that the second use of “ktizo” in Colossians 1:16 was a Present Perfect Continuous; and neither did I as I just learned it.
You have not learned it, because it isn't so. And even if it was, the present perfect continuous involves an action that started in the past. So the wording would still end up being “ALL THINGS have been and are still being created through Jesus”. Do you see how the “still being” doesn't alter the “have been”?Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 16 2011,16:20) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) I want a simple YES or NO answer, Kerwin.
I find a repetitive conversation boring as it does not go anywhere and serves no real purpose. I wrote what I wrote and have discovered nothing new.
I can't find where you wrote the answer to my question, Kerwin. I can't find where you gave a definitive answer as to whether Solomon was saying God was the Maker of ALL THINGS, or only KNOWLEDGE. Could you point me to the post where you answered this DEFINITIVELY?Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 16 2011,16:20) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) I want a simple YES or NO answer, Kerwin.
I find a repetitive conversation boring as it does not go anywhere and serves no real purpose. I wrote what I wrote and have discovered nothing new.
Pierre,Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 17 2011,18:31) Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 16 2011,16:20) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) I want a simple YES or NO answer, Kerwin.
I find a repetitive conversation boring as it does not go anywhere and serves no real purpose. I wrote what I wrote and have discovered nothing new.
Pierre,
Mikewhat I told you,
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 17 2011,11:31) Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 16 2011,16:20) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) I want a simple YES or NO answer, Kerwin.
I find a repetitive conversation boring as it does not go anywhere and serves no real purpose. I wrote what I wrote and have discovered nothing new.
Pierre, IreneMike,
Quote I checked your Apostolic and Interlinear links, neither of which say what you claim they say. The Apostolic doesn't show which form the word is in from what I can tell, but renders it into English as “have been created”. And the interlinear lists the form as “perfect passive indicative”, and also renders it into English as “have been created”. If either of them considered it a “present perfect continuous”, they would have rendered it as “all things have been BEING created through Jesus” and not “have BEEN created through Jesus”. “[has/have + been + present participle]” is the form of the present perfect continuous according to English page.com.
Quote So call it continuous, pluperfect, or whatever you want – it STILL refers to ALL THINGS that had ever existed up until the point Paul wrote Col 1:16 having BEEN created through Jesus. The possibility that things are STILL BEING created through Jesus does NOT change the fact that all things up until that point had also ALREADY BEEN created through Jesus. Do you understand this, Kerwin? The continuous action does NOT change the past action and never will.
So we are back to debating which creation is being spoken of in Colossians 1:16
Quote You want it to say “all things ARE CURRENTLY BEING created through Jesus”, but it simply does NOT say that. If it did, don't you think that some scholar would have figured that out by now? Don't you think we'd have at least one Bible with “are currently being created” in Col 1:16? I am saying that the collective new creation started in the past and has continued up until now. Is that also true of the old creation?
Quote I can't find where you wrote the answer to my question, Kerwin. I can't find where you gave a definitive answer as to whether Solomon was saying God was the Maker of ALL THINGS, or only KNOWLEDGE. Could you point me to the post where you answered this DEFINITIVELY?
My answer was in the form of explaining to you how God being the Maker of all things fit the context of Ecclesiastes 11:1-6.Kerwin……..They simply do not get it nor understand scripture correctly , Paladin and many other have proven that here , truth is not their purpose they are not open to any truth they simply are indoctrinated to the religion of trinitarians and Preexistences and force the texts to say what in fact it does not say in many cases . Mike know full well what you are saying and what Paladin and I have said but He simply want to be right he is here not to Learn but to teach HIS personal dogmas. He has driven off many Poster already and will continue to until He and His Co-hart Pierre is left along here. IMO
I want to commend you Kerwin for your sincere and thoughtful posts brother. Your are right about this continuation meaning thing IMO.
Peace and love to you and yours……………………………………………………..gene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
