GOD (Elohim)–It's meaning

[kenrch]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,07:30)

Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:24) Scripture isn't enough for you?  Sure they believe that Jesus is the Son demons believe but tremble.  But they TEACH Jesus was not the Christ by denying the sign He gave. If you can't SEE that well maybe latter K What I do see is that you try to say because the RCC has certain beliefs and if they or any other organization dosnt line up with yours then they are the harlot and their daughters. Sounds like eliteism to me. You follow some of their doctrines also, yet you pick and choose what is of the Harlot based on whether it agrees with you and your doctrine and then call them daughters of the Harlot when you do the same thing. I find that a little hypocritical. If all of her doctrine is of the whore as you say then you should not follow any of her doctrines either.

Believe what you want WJ. Sooner or latter you will come around.

BTW What day was Jesus resurrected on?

Isn't that the reason you attend services on Sunday?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:54)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,07:30) Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:24) Scripture isn't enough for you?  Sure they believe that Jesus is the Son demons believe but tremble.  But they TEACH Jesus was not the Christ by denying the sign He gave. If you can't SEE that well maybe latter K What I do see is that you try to say because the RCC has certain beliefs and if they or any other organization dosnt line up with yours then they are the harlot and their daughters. Sounds like eliteism to me. You follow some of their doctrines also, yet you pick and choose what is of the Harlot based on whether it agrees with you and your doctrine and then call them daughters of the Harlot when you do the same thing. I find that a little hypocritical. If all of her doctrine is of the whore as you say then you should not follow any of her doctrines either. Believe what you want WJ.  Sooner or latter you will come around. BTW What day was Jesus resurrected on? Isn't that the reason you attend services on Sunday?

K

Judge me if you will by the keeping of holy days and Sabboths if you want .

Paul said to let no man judge us on these things.

You dont know my heart or walk with God so you believe what you want!

Some day you might stop judging mens hearts by your rules and doctrines.

Your critical spirit of me is not at all Christ like.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:54)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,07:30) Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:24) Scripture isn't enough for you?  Sure they believe that Jesus is the Son demons believe but tremble.  But they TEACH Jesus was not the Christ by denying the sign He gave. If you can't SEE that well maybe latter K What I do see is that you try to say because the RCC has certain beliefs and if they or any other organization dosnt line up with yours then they are the harlot and their daughters. Sounds like eliteism to me. You follow some of their doctrines also, yet you pick and choose what is of the Harlot based on whether it agrees with you and your doctrine and then call them daughters of the Harlot when you do the same thing. I find that a little hypocritical. If all of her doctrine is of the whore as you say then you should not follow any of her doctrines either. Believe what you want WJ.  Sooner or latter you will come around. BTW What day was Jesus resurrected on? Isn't that the reason you attend services on Sunday?

K

There is a lot of different Ideas on what day he was raised.

I havnt made up my mind. Its not the day that matters. Its the fact that he rose.

There is no scripture saying you have to believe he was raised in three days to be saved.

Jesus said the sign was the fact that he was raised.

You put the importance on when, I put the imprtance on the fact he rose. Check the scriptures and see if the Apostles made the third day a part of the requirement to be saved and follow Christ.

Its not there.

Again opinions. Read this here is one side…

http://www.letusreason.org/Doct10.htm

[kenrch]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,08:22)

Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:54) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,07:30) Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:24) Scripture isn't enough for you?  Sure they believe that Jesus is the Son demons believe but tremble.  But they TEACH Jesus was not the Christ by denying the sign He gave. If you can't SEE that well maybe latter K What I do see is that you try to say because the RCC has certain beliefs and if they or any other organization dosnt line up with yours then they are the harlot and their daughters. Sounds like eliteism to me. You follow some of their doctrines also, yet you pick and choose what is of the Harlot based on whether it agrees with you and your doctrine and then call them daughters of the Harlot when you do the same thing. I find that a little hypocritical. If all of her doctrine is of the whore as you say then you should not follow any of her doctrines either. Believe what you want WJ.  Sooner or latter you will come around. BTW What day was Jesus resurrected on? Isn't that the reason you attend services on Sunday? K Judge me if you will by the keeping of holy days and Sabboths if you want . Paul said to let no man judge us on these things. You dont know my heart or walk with God so you believe what you want! Some day you might stop judging mens hearts by your rules and doctrines. Your critical spirit of me is not at all Christ like.

Now your just showing your ignorance because you know that's why you attend services on Sunday because the Harlot says that is the day Jesus was resurrected on.  However scripture has proven that the Harlot is a liar.  Matt.12:39-40, John 19:31, Matt 28:5 & 6

I never once said to keep “holy days” or moons or feasts or annual sabbaths.  Jesus nailed Moses law to the cross. Luke 24:44 Col 2:14-16, Deu 10:1-5, 31:9 & 26

Seek and you will find, knock and the scriptures will open up to you.
I gave you scripture and still you ignore the truth and cling to the Harlot.  Don't try to make me out the bad guy I didn't teach you Jesus was resurrected on Sunday.  I'm trying to get you to come out of her as scripture says.  The truth is the truth no one can change it they can twist it turn it every which way but the end result will be as it is written.

Come out of her

IHN&L,

Ken

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,08:41)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,08:22) Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:54) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,07:30) Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:24) Scripture isn't enough for you?  Sure they believe that Jesus is the Son demons believe but tremble.  But they TEACH Jesus was not the Christ by denying the sign He gave. If you can't SEE that well maybe latter K What I do see is that you try to say because the RCC has certain beliefs and if they or any other organization dosnt line up with yours then they are the harlot and their daughters. Sounds like eliteism to me. You follow some of their doctrines also, yet you pick and choose what is of the Harlot based on whether it agrees with you and your doctrine and then call them daughters of the Harlot when you do the same thing. I find that a little hypocritical. If all of her doctrine is of the whore as you say then you should not follow any of her doctrines either. Believe what you want WJ.  Sooner or latter you will come around. BTW What day was Jesus resurrected on?   Isn't that the reason you attend services on Sunday? K Judge me if you will by the keeping of holy days and Sabboths if you want . Paul said to let no man judge us on these things. You dont know my heart or walk with God so you believe what you want! Some day you might stop judging mens hearts by your rules and doctrines. Your critical spirit of me is not at all Christ like. Now your just showing your ignorance because you know that's why you attend services on Sunday because the Harlot says that is the day Jesus was resurrected on.  However scripture has proven that the Harlot is a liar.  Matt.12:39-40, John 19:31, Matt 28:5 & 6 I never once said to keep “holy days” or moons or feasts or annual sabbaths.  Jesus nailed Moses law to the cross. Luke 24:44 Col 2:14-16, Deu 10:1-5, 31:9 & 26 Seek and you will find, knock and the scriptures will open up to you. I gave you scripture and still you ignore the truth and cling to the Harlot.  Don't try to make me out the bad guy I didn't teach you Jesus was resurrected on Sunday.  I'm trying to get you to come out of her as scripture says.  The truth is the truth no one can change it they can twist it turn it every which way but the end result will be as it is written. Come out of her IHN&L, Ken

K

Blessings.

[kenrch]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,08:29)

Quote (kenrch @ April 15 2007,07:54) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 15 2007,07:30) kenrch,April wrote: Scripture isn't enough for you?  Sure they believe that Jesus is the Son demons believe but tremble.  But they TEACH Jesus was not the Christ by denying the sign He gave. If you can't SEE that well maybe latter K What I do see is that you try to say because the RCC has certain beliefs and if they or any other organization dosnt line up with yours then they are the harlot and their daughters. Sounds like eliteism to me. You follow some of their doctrines also, yet you pick and choose what is of the Harlot based on whether it agrees with you and your doctrine and then call them daughters of the Harlot when you do the same thing. I find that a little hypocritical. If all of her doctrine is of the whore as you say then you should not follow any of her doctrines either. ] Believe what you want WJ.  Sooner or latter you will come around. BTW What day was Jesus resurrected on? Isn't that the reason you attend services on Sunday? K There is a lot of different Ideas on what day he was raised. I havnt made up my mind. Its not the day that matters. Its the fact that he rose. There is no scripture saying you have to believe he was raised in three days to be saved. Jesus said the sign was the fact that he was raised. You put the importance on when, I put the imprtance on the fact he rose. Check the scriptures and see if the Apostles made the third day a part of the requirement to be saved and follow Christ. Its not there. Again opinions. Read this here is one side… http://www.letusreason.org/Doct10.htm

What you are saying is that it doesn't matter what Jesus said.

If you believe that Jesus was raised on Sunday then you are calling Him a liar.  
Then the Harlot uses  resurrection Sunday as one and I believe the main reason to break the forth commandment.  Is not this true?  Is not this reason why they “changed the law” that you keep.
Well Jesus shows us that He was not resurrected on Sunday AND that the ONLY sign He was to give is that He would be in the tomb three days and three nights.  Not as the Harlot says.
But you don't think it's important to keep the commandment to walk after God's commandments.  
2Jo 1:6  And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.

This IS the Commandment.  Are you going to keep the Harlot's day to spite that Jesus has shown you it is a lie OR are you going to follow scripture and keep the Commandments of God Trinity or NOT!

IHN&L,

Ken

[kenrch]

I've heard this before. A Jewish day is only 12 hours. How long is a Jewish night?

I suppose the catholics are behind this to save face but it won't work because the Next day was an annual Sabbath He had to be taken down from the cross before the Annual Sabbath. The only way not to observe the annual Sabbath would be that the Annual Sabbath fell on the seventh day Sabbath. The chances for that are slim then that STILL would not explain Jesus said three days and three nights.

Jon 1:17 Now the LORD3068 had prepared4487 a great1419 fish1709 to swallow up1104 (853) Jonah.3124 And Jonah3124 was1961 in the belly4578 of the fish1709 three7969 days3117 and three7969 nights.3915

Day:

H3117
יום
yôm
yome
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): – age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.

Night:

H3915
לילה ליל ליל
layil lêyl layelâh
lah'-yil, lale, lah'-yel-aw
From the same as H3883; properly a twist (away of the light), that is, night; figuratively adversity: – ([mid-]) night (season).

How long was Jonas in the sea monster? 36 hours or three days and three nights?

It truely amazes me how people will go the the extreme to keep their tradition.

Mat 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

Mat 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Mar 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mar 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

As for you my hands are clean; your blood is not on my hands just as most on this forum.

IHN&L,

Ken

[NickHassan]

Hi W,
You said
“If Jesus has the Holy Spirit then that would be 2 Spirits, his and the Holy Spirit.

There is One Spirit, God is Spirit.

The Lord is that Spirit.”

When Jesus Christ walked the earth then he was not the Spirit.
He was the glorious vessel for the treasure within, God as Spirit.
The fullness of the deity of God was in him.

Colossians 2:3
In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
Col2
” 6As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:

7Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. “

We have received the Spirit of Christ.
We follow him so we too can harbour that same treasure.

2 Corinthians 4:7
But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

When he returned to heaven and the Spirit given to him was ministered to his body on earth his brothers knew he was with them again and the Lord Jesus was with them as the Spirit that they knew.

So there is ONE Spirit.
And that Spirit unites us to God in Christ.
Do not imagine or INFER that the Spirit is another person

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 21 2007,17:13)

Hi W, You said “If Jesus has the Holy Spirit then that would be 2 Spirits, his and the Holy Spirit. There is One Spirit, God is Spirit. The Lord is that Spirit.” When Jesus Christ walked the earth then he was not the Spirit. He was the glorious vessel for the treasure within, God as Spirit. The fullness of the deity of God was in him. Colossians 2:3 In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Col2 ” 6As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: 7Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. 8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. “ We have received the Spirit of Christ. We follow him so we too can harbour that same treasure. 2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. When he returned to heaven and the Spirit given to him was ministered to his body on earth his brothers knew he was with them again and the Lord Jesus was with them as the Spirit that they knew. So there is ONE Spirit. And that Spirit unites us to God in Christ. Do not imagine or INFER that the Spirit is another person

NH

How many Spirits are there?

Now if Jesus lives in you and God lives in you and the Spirit lives in you, which scriptures teach.

Then how many spirits do you have?

Look again NH, there is three persons in One. Plurality of Oneness is found in all of creation.

But, De’ Jah Voo.

[NickHassan]

Hi W,
The Spirit is ONE and
is not a member of any trinity.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 21 2007,18:02)

Hi W, The Spirit is ONE and is not a member of any trinity.

NH

Who is the One Spirit?

[NickHassan]

Hi W,
The Spirit of our God.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 21 2007,18:31)

Hi W, The Spirit of our God.

NH

I am Glad you see that God who is Spirit is our God.

Meaning the Spirit is God.

[david]

Quote

You yourself argues that the word “Theos” and “Elohim” can mean rulers and judges and angels. Which are no gods at all. Do you think that Yeshua would be calling men gods and putting them in the same class as the Father and Yeshua?

I never said that Elohim “means” rulers, judges etc. I said that this word is used with reference to them. They are called that.

My human dad is called “Father.” Jehovah is called Father.
You ask: “Do you think that Yeshua would be calling men gods and putting them in the same class as the Father and Yeshua?“
Well, do you think that Yeshua would be calling men “father” and putting them in the same class as Jehovah and Jesus?

Who said this puts them in the same class? “God” is a descriptive word, not a name, or anything like that.

Those others being referred to as “gods” no more puts them in the same class as Jehovah than those who are called “father” today. Yet, this is how you reason.

Quote

You yourself argues that the word “Theos” and “Elohim” can mean rulers and judges and angels. Which are no gods at all.

So then, they were not gods at all, but they were called “gods.” Clearly, either you don't know what that word means, or the Bible is wrong.
I don't think that the angels, the rulers or the judges were false gods, were they? Are the angels false gods?

False gods are things that people portray as having power, but really, have none. All these others rightly had that word applied to them. They all had relative power. Yet, only one has unlimited power or mightiness, and that's the only true God, Jehovah.

[Cult Buster]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 22 2007,06:58)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 21 2007,18:31) Hi W, The Spirit of our God. NH I am Glad you see that God who is Spirit is our God. Meaning the Spirit is God.

Notice who the Spirit is according to the New World Translation:

“Now Jehovah is the Spirit; and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.”

“…exactly as done by Jehovah the Spirit”
(2 Cor. 3:17-18, New World Translation).

Even the Arian's own bible cannot hide the truth!    

[NickHassan]

Hi CB,
If you have found that God is the Spirit
then why do you persists in telling us
the Spirit is a person in God?

[david]

The following is taken from:
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/newworl…..43.htm

“'You are my witnesses,' is the utterance of Jehovah, “even my servant whom I have chosen, in order that you may know and have faith in me, and that you may understand that I am the same One. Before me there was no God formed, and after me there continued to be none. I – I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no saviour'”

We would benefit from noting the context. Jehovah is asking his witnesses, the nation of Israel, to consider the “gods” of the surrounding nations. Their “gods” were claimed to be independant and autonomous from Jehovah as these nations were polytheistic, that is, they not only believed in more than one “god” they actually rendered worship to more than one. This is important for one to grasp if one does not wish to take out of context anything Jehovah says about Himself and his being the only “God” in Isaiah(e.g., 43.10; 44.6; 45.5). In contrast to Jehovah, the God of Israel, these gods have no real power as Jehovah has and has shown throughout this nation's history. Really, these pagan, idol “gods” are non-existent, an unreality.(Is.41:23) Hence, it is truth that Jehovah alone is the true God and he alone is one that saves. There are no others that can rival him or can be compared with him from amongst the pagan nations. However, as can be seen from our discussion of the word “god”(Heb.”elohim”), others who are not false “gods” can be so described. So there are more than just the two categories or usages of elohim(and the Greek word QEOS “God/god”) than a) The one true God(who alone is to be worshipped) and b) False gods. There is another: c) Those who are both representatives and reflections, with power and authority from the one true God(hence, the angels, with spirit, not mere fleshy, natures, are super-human divine beings)can also be termed “god/gods.” John, in his opening verses to his Gospel therein describes the Word, in his prehuman existence, as, not a false, idol, non-existent “god,” nor as a “god” that has, or anyone claims to have, independence and autonomy from the One true God(such as the “gods” of the nations surrounding ancient Israel did which was Jehovah's point when speaking as he did at Isaiah 43.12, 44.6 and 45.5)but as one who was with the one true God, and as 'spokesman'(God's “Word”)of this One was dependant and answerable on this One, could be properly described as a “god.”
The Oxford Companion to the Bible says under its entry “Angels”: “In Israel's early traditions, God was percieved as administrating the cosmos with a retinue of divine assistants. The members of this divine council were identified as “sons of God” and “morning stars”(Job 1.6; 38.7), “gods”(Ps.82) or the “host of heaven”(Neh.9.6; cf. Rev.1.20), and they functioned as God's vicegerents and adminstrators in a hiearchical bureaucracy over the world(Deut. 32.8 [LXX]; cf. 4.19; 29.26). Where Israel's polytheistic nieghbours percieved these beings as simply a part of the pantheon, the Bible depicts them as subordinate and in no way comparable to the God of Israel.”-pp.27, 28. This shows also that when we read such statements in Isaiah that “beside [Jehovah] there is no God(or “god”)” this is not to indicate that none can be said to be “gods” whom are “subordinate” and not being compared to the “one God”(as the angels are); but in the context of this part of Isaiah these statements are a polemic against those “gods,” the “strange gods” of the “polytheistic nieghbours” of Israel that were not “subordinate” to the “one God” and were considered by their worshippers to be “comparable” to Isreal's God. Hence it would be a gross mistake to take certain statements from Isaiah(43.10; 44.6; 45.5) to deny that the “subordinate” angels who are not “compared” with Jehovah can be “gods” themselves as the scriptures in fact testify they are.
There is therefore, when we consider the contexts of both passages, no conflict with Isaiah 43:10 and the New World's Translation's rendering of John 1:1 nor do any statements made by Jehovah in Isaiah preclude the translation of the anarthrous theos as “god” at this place.

However, we should carefully note what Jehovah also says here at Isaiah 43.11.

Jehovah states that besides He there is “no savior.” Is this true? Yes, of course. We can also read at Isaiah 12.2 “Look! God is my[Israel's] salvation. I shall trust and be in no dread; for Jah Jehovah is my strength and my might, and he came to be the salvation of me.” However does not the scriptures themselves call others, other than Jehovah, “saviors”? Yes! For instance see Judges 3.9. Was Othniel a “savior”? Yes. Was Othniel a 'false' savior? Of course not! This shows that Jehovah can state that only he is a “savior” of his people yet at the same time call others who he uses, by 'raising them up' or 'sending' them for purposes of salvation, “saviors.” Hence, it would be wrong for someone to argue that only Jehovah can be a “savior” because of what we read at v.11 of Isaiah 43. It would be equally erroneous then to argue that because Jehovah stated that “Does there exist a God beside me? No, there is no Rock. I have recognized none” (Is.44.8) that Jehovah Himself can not call into existence those who he would recognise as a “god” or “gods” and yet these are not in any way 'false' or non-existent. Note that Jehovah says he “recognises none.”-Is.44.8. That is, Jehovah does not “recognise” any of the nations “gods” that claimed to be independant and autonomous from Jehovah God, the god of the nation of Israel(and that they, the foreign gods, were, has to be accepted because it is an historical fact which can not be denied that the nations around Israel worshipped other gods than Jehovah who were not dependant or answerable to Jehovah ). Jehovah then is the only absolute “God” and only those he calls “gods” or “a god” would he “recognise” as such. This is what Israel was to recognise: That He was a God in whom there is no rival from the nations “gods.” None of these were “saviors” of Israel nor could they save the nation they were a “god” to. One only has to read Isaiah 45.20 where we can read: “Collect yourselves and come[formers/carvers of the “gods of the nations]….[whom] have not come to any knowledge neither have those praying to a god that cannot save.” See also 46.7. Hence what Jehovah says about apart from he there is no “savior” is true towards the “foreign gods” of the nations but it does not apply to those “saviors” Jehovah appoints as such. This shows that one also can not and should not apply Jehovah's words at Isaiah 43.10 nor of 44.6: “…and besides me there is no God” against there being those who Jehovah has created and can be considered “gods” as the angels of God are in fact called. So, those who bring up Isaiah 43.10 and other similiar statements in Isaiah to argue against a grammatically and contextually correct translation of John 1.1c (“and the Word was a god”-New World Translation)are only showing that they have mis-understood the context and hence mis-aplying it in support of a trinitarian understanding of theos at John 1.1 and at the same time showing that they have to resort to such a misunderstanding because of the strength of the grammatical arguments that favour the “Word” there being described, no, not as “God,” but as “a god” who was with “God.”

[Cult Buster]

The following is taken from  

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/j01.html

What Greek Scholars Think of the New World Translation

This collection of quotes, found on many Christian Bulletin Boards, primarily addresses the Jehovah Witnesses mistranslation of John 1:1

Dr. J. R. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159) of the Witnesses own Kingdom interlinear Translation):

“A shocking mistranslation.” “Obsolete and incorrect.” “It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'”
Dr. Bruce M. Metzger of Princeton (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature):

“A frightful mistranslation.” “Erroneous” and “pernicious” “reprehensible” “If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists.”
Dr. Samuel J. Mikolaski of Zurich, Switzerland:

“This anarthrous (used without the article) construction does not mean what the indefinite article 'a' means in English. It is monstrous to translate the phrase 'the Word was a god.'”
Dr. Paul L. Kaufman of Portland, Oregon:

“The Jehovah's Witnesses people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1.”
Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California:

“I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar.”
Dr. James L. Boyer of Winona Lake, Indiana:

“I have never heard of, or read of any Greek Scholar who would have agreed to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah's Witnesses…I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language.”
Dr. Walter R. Martin (who did not teach Greek but has studied the language):

“The translation…'a god' instead of 'God' is erroneous and unsupported by any good Greek scholarship, ancient or contemporary and is a translation rejected by all recognized scholars of the Greek language may of whom are not even Christians, and cannot fairly be said to be biased in favor of the orthodox contention.”
Dr. William Barclay of the University of Glasgow, Scotland:

“The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: '…the Word was a god,' a translation which is grammatically impossible…It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest.”
Dr. F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester, England:

“Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with 'God' in the phrase 'And the Word was God.' Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction…'a god' would be totally indefensible.” [Barclay and Bruce are generally regarded as Great Britain's leading Greek scholars. Both have New Testament translations in print!]
Dr. Ernest C. Colwell of the University of Chicago:

“A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb…this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas. 'My Lord and my God.' – John 20:28”
Dr. Phillip B. Harner of Heidelberg College:

“The verb preceding an anarthrous predicate, would probably mean that the LOGOS was 'a god' or a divine being of some kind, belonging to the general category of THEOS but as a distinct being from HO THEOS. In the form that John actually uses, the word “THEOS” is places at the beginning for emphasis.”
Dr. J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach:

“No justification whatsoever for translating THEOS EN HO LOGOS as 'the Word was a god.' There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct….I am neither a Christian nor a trinitarian.”
Dr. Eugene A. Nida, head of Translations Department, American Bible Society:

“With regard to John 1:1, there is of course a complication simply because the New World Translation was apparently done by persons who did not take seriously the syntax of the Greek.” [Responsible for the Good News Bible – The committee worked under him.]
Dr. B. F. Wescott (whose Greek text – not the English part – is used in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation):

“The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in IV.24. It is necessarily without the article…No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word…in the third clause 'the Word' is declared to be 'God' and so included in the unity of the Godhead.”
Dr. J. J. Griesbach (whose Greek text – not the English part – is used in the Emphatic Diaglott):

“So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favour of the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the passage, John 1:1-3, is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the truth.”

Joh 1:5  And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.  

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (david @ May 01 2007,20:27)

The following is taken from: http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/newworl…..43.htm “'You are my witnesses,' is the utterance of Jehovah, “even my servant whom I have chosen, in order that you may know and have faith in me, and that you may understand that I am the same One. Before me there was no God formed, and after me there continued to be none. I – I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no saviour'” We would benefit from noting the context. Jehovah is asking his witnesses, the nation of Israel, to consider the “gods” of the surrounding nations. Their “gods” were claimed to be independant and autonomous from Jehovah as these nations were polytheistic, that is, they not only believed in more than one “god” they actually rendered worship to more than one. This is important for one to grasp if one does not wish to take out of context anything Jehovah says about Himself and his being the only “God” in Isaiah(e.g., 43.10; 44.6; 45.5). In contrast to Jehovah, the God of Israel, these gods have no real power as Jehovah has and has shown throughout this nation's history. Really, these pagan, idol “gods” are non-existent, an unreality.(Is.41:23) Hence, it is truth that Jehovah alone is the true God and he alone is one that saves. There are no others that can rival him or can be compared with him from amongst the pagan nations. However, as can be seen from our discussion of the word “god”(Heb.”elohim”), others who are not false “gods” can be so described. So there are more than just the two categories or usages of elohim(and the Greek word QEOS “God/god”) than a) The one true God(who alone is to be worshipped) and b) False gods. There is another: c) Those who are both representatives and reflections, with power and authority from the one true God(hence, the angels, with spirit, not mere fleshy, natures, are super-human divine beings)can also be termed “god/gods.” John, in his opening verses to his Gospel therein describes the Word, in his prehuman existence, as, not a false, idol, non-existent “god,” nor as a “god” that has, or anyone claims to have, independence and autonomy from the One true God(such as the “gods” of the nations surrounding ancient Israel did which was Jehovah's point when speaking as he did at Isaiah 43.12, 44.6 and 45.5)but as one who was with the one true God, and as 'spokesman'(God's “Word”)of this One was dependant and answerable on this One, could be properly described as a “god.” The Oxford Companion to the Bible says under its entry “Angels”: “In Israel's early traditions, God was percieved as administrating the cosmos with a retinue of divine assistants. The members of this divine council were identified as “sons of God” and “morning stars”(Job 1.6; 38.7), “gods”(Ps.82) or the “host of heaven”(Neh.9.6; cf. Rev.1.20), and they functioned as God's vicegerents and adminstrators in a hiearchical bureaucracy over the world(Deut. 32.8 [LXX]; cf. 4.19; 29.26). Where Israel's polytheistic nieghbours percieved these beings as simply a part of the pantheon, the Bible depicts them as subordinate and in no way comparable to the God of Israel.”-pp.27, 28. This shows also that when we read such statements in Isaiah that “beside [Jehovah] there is no God(or “god”)” this is not to indicate that none can be said to be “gods” whom are “subordinate” and not being compared to the “one God”(as the angels are); but in the context of this part of Isaiah these statements are a polemic against those “gods,” the “strange gods” of the “polytheistic nieghbours” of Israel that were not “subordinate” to the “one God” and were considered by their worshippers to be “comparable” to Isreal's God. Hence it would be a gross mistake to take certain statements from Isaiah(43.10; 44.6; 45.5) to deny that the “subordinate” angels who are not “compared” with Jehovah can be “gods” themselves as the scriptures in fact testify they are. There is therefore, when we consider the contexts of both passages, no conflict with Isaiah 43:10 and the New World's Translation's rendering of John 1:1 nor do any statements made by Jehovah in Isaiah preclude the translation of the anarthrous theos as “god” at this place. However, we should carefully note what Jehovah also says here at Isaiah 43.11. Jehovah states that besides He there is “no savior.” Is this true? Yes, of course. We can also read at Isaiah 12.2 “Look! God is my[Israel's] salvation. I shall trust and be in no dread; for Jah Jehovah is my strength and my might, and he came to be the salvation of me.” However does not the scriptures themselves call others, other than Jehovah, “saviors”? Yes! For instance see Judges 3.9. Was Othniel a “savior”? Yes. Was Othniel a 'false' savior? Of course not! This shows that Jehovah can state that only he is a “savior” of his people yet at the same time call others who he uses, by 'raising them up' or 'sending' them for purposes of salvation, “saviors.” Hence, it would be wrong for someone to argue that only Jehovah can be a “savior” because of what we read at v.11 of Isaiah 43. It would be equally erroneous then to argue that because Jehovah stated that “Does there exist a God beside me? No, there is no Rock. I have recognized none” (Is.44.8) that Jehovah Himself can not call into existence those who he would recognise as a “god” or “gods” and yet these are not in any way 'false' or non-existent. Note that Jehovah says he “recognises none.”-Is.44.8. That is, Jehovah does not “recognise” any of the nations “gods” that claimed to be independant and autonomous from Jehovah God, the god of the nation of Israel(and that they, the foreign gods, were, has to be accepted because it is an historical fact which can not be denied that the nations around Israel worshipped other gods than Jehovah who were not dependant or answerable to Jehovah ). Jehovah then is the only absolute “God” and only those he calls “gods” or “a god” would he “recognise” as such. This is what Israel was to recognise: That He was a God in whom there is no rival from the nations “gods.” None of these were “saviors” of Israel nor could they save the nation they were a “god” to. One only has to read Isaiah 45.20 where we can read: “Collect yourselves and come[formers/carvers of the “gods of the nations]….[whom] have not come to any knowledge neither have those praying to a god that cannot save.” See also 46.7. Hence what Jehovah says about apart from he there is no “savior” is true towards the “foreign gods” of the nations but it does not apply to those “saviors” Jehovah appoints as such. This shows that one also can not and should not apply Jehovah's words at Isaiah 43.10 nor of 44.6: “…and besides me there is no God” against there being those who Jehovah has created and can be considered “gods” as the angels of God are in fact called. So, those who bring up Isaiah 43.10 and other similiar statements in Isaiah to argue against a grammatically and contextually correct translation of John 1.1c (“and the Word was a god”-New World Translation)are only showing that they have mis-understood the context and hence mis-aplying it in support of a trinitarian understanding of theos at John 1.1 and at the same time showing that they have to resort to such a misunderstanding because of the strength of the grammatical arguments that favour the “Word” there being described, no, not as “God,” but as “a god” who was with “God.”

David

You still have not given me an example of the word “Theos” being ascribed to any Angel of God, or a living King or man in the New Testament times.

Other than the Father a
nd Yeshua and false gods, there is none.

[Unisage]

These are not my words These are from a brother D.J. Love Minister.

According to Strong's Concordance (which isn't purely without prejudice) the following are the definitions of Kurios, and Theos.

KURIOS, Strong's #2962: He who is “In Charge” or “In Authority.” The Supreme Authority (for a specific realm of influence).

THEOS, Strong's #2316: As a figure of speech, “A Magistrate” or a “Supreme Divinity.” OR “godly” (like G-d) (Image of G-d) OR even G-d (G-d is listed only because G-d has G-dly qualities, is Divine, and is Supreme, but G-d is not the only one with those qualities). Strong's Concordance only lists G-d as a last choice, because anyone that has received G-d's Holy Spirit or Righteous Character has G-dly qualities; and The Messiah certainly has G-dly qualities.

Note: The Eternal “Self Existent” GOD (YHWH or YHVH) can only be implied with 100% certainty when both Kurios and Theos are placed side by side as “KURIOS THEOS.” The conjunction 'and' (between Kurios 'and' Theos) is not sufficient enough to replace “KURIOS THEOS.” This “Side by Side” form of “KURIOS THEOS” is used exclusively in the 'New Testament' (The Epistles) to positively indicate only YHWH, and not His First begotten (resurrected) son, Messiah Yahshua. While Messiah is both a Kurios, 'and' a Theos, he is not a “KURIOS THEOS.”
There are zero examples of the Messiah ever being referred to as “KURIOS THEOS” anywhere in the Bible. The following New Testament verses are positive indicators where “KURIOS THEOS” has been used in the Epistles to exclusively indicate Yahweh: Luke 1:32, 1:68; 1 Peter 3:15,Revelation 4:8, 11:17, 15:3, 16:7, 18:8, 19:6, 21:22, 22:5, and 22:6. However, when you see “Lord Yahweh” or Lord god” in English, this does not necessarily indicate “KURIOS THEOS,” as is shown in Jude 1:4. Jude 1:4 says “Lord god,” meaning a lesser title than “LORD GOD.”

According to Strong's Concordance:

Jude 1:4 says, “For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our G-d into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord god, and our Lord Messiah Yahshua. Here we find “Lord” to be Strong's #1203 (Despotes, which means “Husband” or “Master of the House”). “Despotes Theos” is not “KURIOS THEOS” (the 'Side by Side' form), thus we are not presented with the positive indicator of Yahweh, but with Yahweh's Magistrate or proxy.

The Tanakh (Older Testament) use of “Yehovah Elohiym” as “L_RD G_D” is even more specific than “KURIOS THEOS,” as YeHOVAH, The Self-Existent or Eternal GOD. If used with Strong's #430, Elohiym (El-O-Heem), meaning “gods” or “magistrates,” then it indicates the “Supreme GOD”. However, Elohiym all by itself will indicate Magistrates of GOD. I do not promote the use of the words 'god' and 'gods' to indicate those who serve GOD or those who are His children, as this borders on pagan polytheism.

At first glance the less knowledgeable would immediately jump to an untrue conclusion, and ASSUME that “My Kurios and My Theos” must be G-d (Yahweh). However, one must not only look at the context of the chapter, but one must make sure that John's statement about Thomas is entirely in agreement with ALL Scripture. After all, Yahweh's inspired word is not chaotic, but harmonious (if properly translated and understood).

Note: Satan (source of human nature) has created a veil or scales over the eyes of Christians, Nazarenes, and Cabalistic Messianics. This veil leads them to approach their study of Inspired Scriptures and Inspired Apostolic Writings from a preconceived PAGAN GREEK (Babylonian) perspective. That veil being that Jesus (IHSous) is G-d. _ _ Well folks, GREEKS and ROMANS did NOT write down the original “Inspired Words of Yahweh.” Inspired Hebrews did, and not for one second did Moses, King David, King Solomon, the prophets or any of the Apostles (etc…) ever believe or ever make the statement that Yahweh (G-d) was more than ONE; therefore Yahweh's Inspired words must only be studied from that Inspired Hebrew perspective.

The very first thing that MUST be understood is that Thomas had doubts that Messiah had actually risen from among the dead. However, AFTER he discovered that Messiah was resurrected, he immediately (mentally) applied to the Messiah what he had previously been taught would be the Messiah's NEW TITLES. Thomas knew beforehand that Messiah Yahshua would be GIVEN ALL (Supreme) AUTHORITY over Mankind and over The Earth (Ephesians1); BUT AUTHORITY DOES NOT MAKE A HUMAN INTO GOD ! Not even Messiah Yahshua! In order to be G-d, you must be “Self-existent,” and Yahshua (Jesus if you must) is not self-existent.

So what about the word “Divinity?” A “Divinity” is anyone with a “Divine Nature.” Of course, Yahweh is “Divine,” but so is Yahshua, as are ALL of Yahweh's Heavenly Hosts! (Heavenly Hosts does not refer to celestial stars, but “The 24 Elders [Rev.4:4],” “Yahweh's Righteous Messengers or Angels, etc. ).

So what about the descriptive word “Supreme?” Again, since Yahweh placed Yahshua into his position of having Yahweh's Supreme Authority, as Yahweh's Supreme Magistrate (“Right Hand Man”), then Yahshua welds all the authority that Yahweh will allow him to have; and according to the Apostolic writings, Yahshua acts on behalf of Yahweh (as His Proxy) with all power and authority. This is no different than a military General acting on behalf of the President of the United States, except that the Messiah can be trusted with Yahweh's awesome power, and a mere human General cannot.

Ephesians 1:19-23
19 and what is the exceeding greatness of His (Yahweh's) power toward us who believe, according to that working of the strength of His might
20 which He (Yahweh) worked in Messiah, when He (Yahweh) raised him from among the dead, and made him to sit at His right hand (AS His Supreme Magistrate and Proxy) in the heavenly places,
21 far above all (Earthly) rule, and (Earthly) authority, and (Earthly) power, and (Earthly) dominion, and every (Earthly) name that is named, not only in this (Earthly) world , but also in that (Earthly world) which is to come (promised land or New Jerusalem).
22 He put all (Earthly) things in subjection under his feet (Authority), and gave him to be head over all things to the assembly (the True Worshippers),
23 which is his body (Marriage partner or Bride), the fullness of him who fills all in all.

There is one very common error that most people tend to make, and that is to assume that True Statements are, also, true when applied in the reverse order. And while it is sometimes true, it is rarely true.

True Examples:
(1) Black is the opposite of white, and thus white is the opposite of black. (TRUE)

(2) The Righteous are like Yahweh in Spirit, and thus those like Yahweh in Spirit are Righteous. (TRUE)

Untrue Examples: (These are (FALSE) relationships)

(1) All cows are animals, thus all animals are cows. (FALSE)

(2) G-d has supreme Authority, and thus all who have Supreme Authority are G-d. (FALSE) Yes, this is absolutely false.

(3) Messiah Yahshua sits on the Right Hand of Yahweh, and thus Yahweh sits on the Right Hand of Yahshua. (FALSE)

(4) Yahweh is Divine, and thus all Divine beings are Yahweh. (FALSE)

(5) G-d has a Spiritual IMAGE, and thus those with G-d's Spiritual IMAGE are G-d. (FALSE)

[Author]

Posts