Examination of the incarnation doctrine.

[Pastry]

Paladin! I can read, and Mike highlighted “generally” and ” they kept on asking…and not the verb “to be.' .Mike just forget it, its not worth the time you spend with it…..

Peace and Love Irene

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2011,02:21)

[/quote] Quote (Paladin @ July 16 2011,04:01) Can you tell the difference between “Bolded” and “green letters?” I never said you “bolded the words “To  be,” I said you “highlighted the verb “to be” in green letters Mike, so please, quit saying you did not reference the verb “to be.” Paladin, for the FOURTH TIME, I simply quoted the WHOLE piece of info from NETNotes.  I always put secular sources in green letters and scriptures in brown letters to set them aside from my own purple letters. Did I ever bring up the “to be” part of NETNote's info to you?  Did I ever try to make a claim that “echo” was the verb “to be”?   If so, show me where I did this.  And I mean the EXACT sentence where I ever tried to use the “to be” part of the NETNotes quote as an argument.

Mike, are you in a time warp? Why do you consistantly ask me a question I have just answered in the post you are questioning about?

I just posted to you, (the post you are now responding to) how you mixed up the imperfect and the past tense terms. Look again at THAT sentence and you will have the answer to your new question.

Quote

Do you think we can't all see what you're doing?  The disagreement never was about “to be”, although you'd like to divert everyone’s attention to that to distract them from the REAL issue.

O.K., Mike, I think I understand it now… You screw up, it was a mistake, I post something you want worded a different way, it is a diversion with malice aforethought.

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2011,03:19)

Paladin, Is God Almighty a “Being”?  YES or NO? Thanks for your thoughts on this matter, mike

He is “The being.”

[Paladin]

Quote (Pastry @ July 17 2011,07:40)

Paladin!  I can read, and Mike highlighted “generally” and ” they kept on asking…and not the verb “to be.'  .Mike just forget it, its not worth the time you spend with it….. Peace and Love Irene

I suppose you failed to notice Mike also called “kept on” a past tense when it is imperfect?

[mikeboll64]

Paladin,

Is this what we're discussing?  What I said was that even WITHIN the imperfect tense, it is PAST TENSE WORDS that describe the “continuous action”.  The word “KEPT” is the PAST TENSE of the word KEEP, right?

Paladin, I'm simply tired of you and your games.  I have used much time out of my life trying to get a simple question answered.  Why Paladin?  Are you UNABLE to answer the question?

I will not rest until you answer this question.  And I am about to bring this to the attention of the owner of the site.  I will NOT allow you to just spout untrue things using Greek terms and rules of grammar that might be out of many of our member's area of expertise.  What you did was try to change the meaning of scripture and possibly the minds of pre-existent believers with a LIE that you thought was “over our heads”.  Guess again, sonny.  I WILL keep you honest.  So remember that the next time you try it, okay?

Paladin, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO?

[mikeboll64]

Also,

You made an accusation about me “twisting” your words and making it seem like you said the “reverse” of what you really said.

You have now posted your “proof”, in which there is NO instance of this happening.

So, will you offer the mandatory correction with optional apology? Or will I offer the mandatory tile for making false accusations against another member?

Moderator

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Paladin @ July 16 2011,19:37)

Quote (Pastry @ July 17 2011,07:40) Paladin!  I can read, and Mike highlighted “generally” and ” they kept on asking…and not the verb “to be.'  .Mike just forget it, its not worth the time you spend with it….. Peace and Love Irene I suppose you failed to notice Mike also called “kept on” a past tense when it is imperfect?

Thank you Irene.

Did you see how Paladin slighted right over your recognition that he was wrong, and right into a completely different false claim?  

It's like, after realizing I didn't call him “fat” when he claimed I did, he glosses right over it and says, “Yeah, but he called me 'stupid' “.

Paladin, STAND AND ACKNOWLEDGE that I didn't “highlight” anything about the verb “to be”.  OWN UP to your mistake and false claim, Christian Brother!  Don't hide from it.  You were wrong.  Now do the Christian thing and acknowledge that you were wrong, and apologize.

mike

[Pastry]

Mike, yes I did…. And I am glad that you are not going to let Him get away with it…. But I think you better not hold your breath, I don't think you are going to get an apology from Him… I hope He will though….
Peace and Love Irene

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2011,13:55)

Paladin, Is this what we're discussing?  What I said was that even WITHIN the imperfect tense, it is PAST TENSE WORDS that describe the “continuous action”.  The word “KEPT” is the PAST TENSE of the word KEEP, right?

NO Mike, it is not. While It may be true, it is an English “past” it is a Greek “imperfect.” And after all, it is my knowledge of the “Greek” you are all puffed up about, and denying I know anything, right, Mike?

“Kept” is Greek “imperfect,” Mike, not “past.” I have been trying to tell you this for a long time now, but you have been contesting my use of Greek, with English grammar and rules.

And I have repeatedly told you “you are getting your “Greek” out of commentaries and, and getting it wrong.” Now we finally find out why. You are arguing Greek issues from the English vocabulary and grammar.

Quote

I will not rest until you answer this question.  And I am about to bring this to the attention of the owner of the site.  I will NOT allow you to just spout untrue things using Greek terms and rules of grammar that might be out of many of our member's area of expertise.  What you did was try to change the meaning of scripture and possibly the minds of pre-existent believers with a LIE that you thought was “over our heads”.  Guess again, sonny.  I WILL keep you honest.  So remember that the next time you try it, okay?

I already asked t8 to monitor this site beginning with page 196, when I posted 196-1, “to keep me honest,” not to threaten anyone else, which is why I did not mention it before, so feel free. If he feels I have mistreated you, he can take appropriate action. If he feels you have mistreated me, I cannot be responsible. If I am banned, I will simply move on to where I am welcome. So save your threats for someone who fears your anger.

Quote

Paladin, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO?

Mike, once more, and for the last time, it is not a “yes” or “no” answer, so quit asking it in a “yes” or “no” format.

When you were told on page 163 post #8 –

Quote (Paladin @ June 02 2011 @ 01:16)

[EIXON] [NOTE: Imperfect Indicative [eixon] describes a continuing action occuring in the past. If in fact, Jesus had prior glory, and now does not, but asks to have it again, the tense would not be “imperfect” for the “imperfect” references action that was continuous. Had John used the “perfect” tense, it would have been an action that was brought to completion, with present continuous results. But John did not use the “perfect” tense of echo [esxeeka; 2 Cor 2:13][esxeekamen, Ro 5:2; II Co 1:9][esxeeken, II Co 7:5][esxeekota, Mark 5:15]. If John intended to convey a prehistoric glory Jesus once had, but no longer has, as in “discontinued,” it would be aorist, simple completed action form of echo;[esxomen, I Thes 1:9]; or [esxon; Mat 22:28;Mark 12:23;Luke 20:33; Philemon 1:7;Jude 1:3]. But John used the imperfect form of echo, which constitutes an action occuring without discontinuity in the past.

Then over in 165-1 you raised an English language question based upon a Greek grammar issue:

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 02 2011,13:06)

Paladin,June wrote: [NOTE: Imperfect Indicative [eixon] describes a continuing action occuring in the past. If in fact, Jesus had prior glory, and now does not, but asks to have it again, the tense would not be “imperfect” for the “imperfect” references action that was continuous.

Here's your English language question:

Quote

The action WAS contiuous?  Or the action will keep on continuing until the end of time?

A careful reading of the post will show the answer was already given – i.e.,  the “imperfect” references action that was continuous.

If the action was continuous, how is it in any way involoved with “forbidding” anything at all in the english translation? It is not involved with permitting or forbidding. That is strictly your own speculative excercise.

So why the question Mike? It was not based on the Greek, because the Greek was already published for all to see. You were trying to change the meaning from Greek imperfect, which references continuous action, to english past tense where you then could apply the consequence of your question i.e., “Or the action will keep on continuing until the end of time?”  Mike, and have been on a campaign to discredit my Greek use ever since.

Then you referenced NetNotes to justify your Greek to English swap –

Quote

From NETNotes: 5775 Tense – Imperfect The imperfect tense generally represents continual or repeated action. Where the present tense might indicate “they are asking,” the imperfect would indicate “they kept on asking.” In the case of the verb “to be,” however, the imperfect tense is used as a general past tense and does not carry the connotation of continual or repeated action.

Do you see it Mike? In the Greek, the imperfect would indicate “they kept on asking.”

But you switched to the English “past” of kept, to make your point feasible. Notice, Mike, I am not saying this was your motive, only you can supply that; I am saying it was the result of your manipulation of the Greek to English translation.

Here is where you begin manipulating (perhaps not intentionally, but the result is the same) the Greek to agree with the english:

Quote

So what I'm asking you, Paladin, is why the PAST TENSE word “kept” is in NETNote's illustration?  In your first sample scripture, Matt 14:5, the people held John as a prophet.  HELD, or REGARDED, or BELIEVED or THOUGHT, or CONSIDERED him as a prophet.  These are all past tense words, right?

And of course, the answer is “No!” they are not all “past tense words” in the Greek. Your argument is about the english past tense, b
ut the Greek imperfect.

And, though I have repeated this over and over Mike, I have not been able to make it clear because (in my estimation) you wanted me to understand your point worse than you wanted to understand my point.

And here is where you draw a false English conclusion to a Greek issue.

Quote

But did John ever discontinue being a prophet?  Of course, because he died.  So your “discontinue” point is null and void, because Matthew was not saying that the people ARE STILL CONTINUING TO THINK JOHN IS A PROPHET TO THIS VERY DAY, as if this action hasn't since discontinued.

There is no way you are going to resolve your problem with this mike, because you have switched from trying to force an English meaning from a Greek phrase, to the problem of forcing Paladin to be “honest” (as you put it) according to your values, based upon faulty Greek, and Faulty English.

I am telling you once more, You have accused me of
“intentionally” misleading, of “deliberately” posting false information, and a host of other falsely applied labels, just because of your own ignorance of Greek and English, as they interact in translation and application.

I have not assigned motive to you, only pointed out errors which you have employed in your responses to my posts. And the fact that it took me a little while to research and figure out where it went wrong, you became more practiced in accusing me of perfidious activity. I have not asked you for apology, because I am not sure you even know what has been said, but I do ask that you stop with your tirade of accusatons against me.

And stop calling me “sonny.”

So far, I have demonstrated every claim to be true, while all of yours have fallen by the wayside. Don't you suppose the time has come to move on? Or do you prefer to have t8 to settle anything between us? I will stand on the record as posted.

“Come, let us reason together, (saith the Lord).”

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2011,02:58)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 16 2011,09:37) MIke……..This has nothing to do with Paladin, it has to do with you saying I was saying what he said was “Wrong” , and that was a LIE any way you want to hack it. Well let's see.  I have been asking a simple question about the imperfect tense of “echo” for a long time.  Marty finally answered my question honestly and correctly – for there IS only one truthful answer to that specific question. I taunted you saying, “See Gene?  Paladin WAS wrong!” And your next response was, in essence, “I knew all along that Paladin was going to run into trouble with this 'echo' thing”. So forgive me for taking that sequence of words and events to mean that you also knew the correct answer to the question like Marty did.  But that IS truly how I took your statement.  Therefore, it wasn't a LIE, like you've been saying, but an apparent misunderstanding. Which brings the same question back up to you again: Gene, did the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO? Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 16 2011,09:37) So be the Man Here and give yourself a Tile as you so quickly do others disagree with you who you accuse of lying Could you show me the time I “quickly” gave anyone a tile?  Could you show me the time where anyone got a tile from me without first being given the opportunity to make a correction of their statement to avoid the tile? Ask Jack if he got a chance to correct what he said before receiving his tiles.  Ask Istari if I gave him the same chance. Now, anyone in their right mind would have taken the same circumstance and words to mean the same thing I took them to mean.  And for YOU to keep insisting I “lied” when it's obvious that it was an honest mistake is a lie in itself, Gene.  So perhaps it is YOU who should receive a tile, eh? mike

Mike………….You so now yours was just a Mistake while others were deliberate, while “Taunting” is Ok for you, they and me are deserving a Tile, while poor misunderstanding and taunting Mike is not. Point is you are completely wrong about what I have said Just as your are about what Paladin has said also. So tile away it seem to be the only thing you are really good at here. It certainly is not in understand scriptures IMO.

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2011,13:58)

Also, You made an accusation about me “twisting” your words and making it seem like you said the “reverse” of what you really said. You have now posted your “proof”, in which there is NO instance of this happening. So, will you offer the mandatory correction with optional apology?  Or will I offer the mandatory tile for making false accusations against another member? Moderator

You obviously do not respond well to kindness, nor can you read. I will let t8 sort it out.

[mikeboll64]

Quote

Quote Paladin, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO? Mike, once more, and for the last time, it is not a “yes” or “no” answer, so quit asking it in a “yes” or “no” format.

YES, it IS.  Your brother Marty has already answered with the correct and honest answer to the question.  Your brother Marty even made a petition to you to answer the simple question.

What are you afraid of, Paladin?  I've already proved you wrong on so many other issues – what's one more?    (Remember “highlighting” the verb “to be”?  What happened with that one?   Remember “whether”?   What happened with that one?  Remember “Mike quoted my pm”?  What happened with that one?  Remember “name is called”?  What happened with that one?  Those are just a few of the times I've showed you to be WRONG. )

Just answer the question please.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Paladin @ July 14 2011,17:20)

I have been collecting data that shows where you changed the wording of what I posted, to the reverse, then claimed it was my post. You have done this several times, then gotten into arguments with others on the board, calling me names and saying terrible things about me. It is time for all that to stop.

Paladin,

This is the accusation you made about me a couple of days ago.  You have as of yet produced no such data.

You need to either produce that data, post a correction and apology for slandering my good name, or receive a tile.

Those are the rules dude.  (Actually, the rules don't give the benefit of being able to apologize to avoid the tile – that part comes from my good grace.)

Which is it to be?

Moderator

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 17 2011,08:13)

Point is you are completely wrong about what I have said Just as your are about what Paladin has said also.

Hi Gene,

I have a couple of questions about that:

5775 Tense – Imperfect
The imperfect tense generally represents continual or repeated action. Where the present tense might indicate “they are asking,” the imperfect would indicate “they kept on asking.” In the case of the verb “to be,” however, the imperfect tense is used as a general past tense and does not carry the connotation of continual or repeated action.
1.  Gene, could you point out the five words in this quote that I “highlighted” for Paladin?

2.  Gene, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO?

Thanks in advance,
mike

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 18 2011,02:49)

[/quote] Quote Quote Paladin, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO? Mike, once more, and for the last time, it is not a “yes” or “no” answer, so quit asking it in a “yes” or “no” format. Quote YES, it IS. NO! IT IS NOT! [quotye]Remember “highlighting” the verb “to be”?  What happened with that one? Remember “whether”?   What happened with that one?  Remember “Mike quoted my pm”?  What happened with that one?  Remember “name is called”?  What happened with that one?

you were wrong every time. Your system is to be the last poster to make a claim in any controversy. If the other poster doesn't post back, you jump in with a victory claim.

Quote

Remember “Mike quoted my pm”? What happened with that one?

Tell me Mike, if you did not quote my PM,[see 57-8] why did you respond to Karmerie's post [see 58-1] by saying “Paladin ok'd it?” instead of saying “I didn't use his PM?” No , Mike, you quoted the PM, then spent several days trying to find or invent a loophole to get out of the fix you put yourself in; your either were wrong when you said “Paladin ok'd is” or you were wrong when you said “I never used your PM. You can't have it both ways. At least you convinced Karmarie you used it “with permission.” I was convinced because you explained your use of it to her.

Quote

Remember “whether”? What happened with that one?

You kept on posting your misinformation after I quit, because I saw you would never quit.

Quote

Remember “name is called”? What happened with that one?

You continued to post long after I quit, because you will never see your error. you are continually mixing English language arguments with Greek grammar. But no one can tell you that.

Quote

Just answer the question please.

See previous post.

[mikeboll64]

Paladin, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past? YES or NO?

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 18 2011,11:57)

Paladin, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO?

Already asked and answered.

[mikeboll64]

Yes, it has been correctly answered by mikeboll64, who said “NO”.  It has been correctly answered by Marty, who also said “NO”.  I'll assume that you and Gene also answer “NO”, because you are both honest men.  

So, what's next?  Shall we continue our discussion about John 6?      

Just kidding, Pal.  I want nothing further to do with you…………except to read the correction/apology for posting a false accusation about me a couple of days ago.

[Ed J]

Quote (Paladin @ July 18 2011,12:15)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 18 2011,11:57) Paladin, does the imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5, IN AND OF ITSELF, prohibit Jesus from asking for the return of a glory he had in the past?  YES or NO? Already asked and answered.

Hi Paladin,

I haven't been following this thread much, but
could you re-post your answer for all to see?

Your brother
in Christ, Jesus.
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 18 2011,12:31)

Yes, it has been correctly answered by mikeboll64, who said “NO”.  It has been correctly answered by Marty, who also said “NO”.  I'll assume that you and Gene also answer “NO”, because you are both honest men.   So, what's next?  Shall we continue our discussion about John 6?       Just kidding, Pal.  I want nothing further to do with you…………except to read the correction/apology for posting a false accusation about me a couple of days ago.

Promise?

[Author]

Posts