In the Beginning

[abe]

Hi,

I have a question? The Kingdom of God is in the future? We now live in the Kingdom of the Heavens?

Matt.13:47 The Kingdom of the Heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind,

:48 which, when it was full, they drew to shore; and they sat down and gathered the good into vessels, but threw the bad away.

We are not there YET.

Peace.

[terraricca]

Quote (abe @ Jan. 08 2013,02:16)

Hi, I have a question? The Kingdom of God is in the future? We now live in the Kingdom of the Heavens? Matt.13:47       The Kingdom of the Heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind,           :48        which, when it was full, they drew to shore; and they sat down and gathered the good into vessels, but threw the bad away. We are not there YET. Peace.

hi Abe

the kingdom of God =encompasses all other

the kingdom of Christ God's son = encompasses all of creation ,

so we all are in to Gods kingdom but not all under his rule .

wen Christ will be totally in charge ten we would also receive all the blessings of his sacrifice, like the end of dead,

[mikeboll64]

Quote (2besee @ Jan. 05 2013,16:19)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 06 2013,04:04) Quote (2besee @ Jan. 03 2013,19:28) Mike, no, now it is talking about JESUS. Okay 2B, I can now see where you and I go off track from each other, and I will address this concern in a later post, for I have something to do right now. Final verse: John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but the only begotten god (or son – depending on which Greek ms you use), who is at the Father’s side, has made him known. In verse 18, is John still talking about the Word from verse one?  YES or NO? Mike this is ridiculous, it is like a slow train never arriving at it's destination.

2B,

Didn't you notice my words “Final Verse” before the quote of 1:18?

So, I have two questions concerning that final verse:

1.  Is John still writing about the Word of God from verse 1?  YES or NO?

2.  Do you prefer a reading of “only begotten god”, or “only begotten son”, in verse 18?  (Both readings are supported by important Greek mss, so I am happy to use your choice for this exercise.)

[terraricca]

Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 07 2013,18:21)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 07 2013,14:46) Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 07 2013,02:14) T, Quote WEN Jesus Christ ascend to his father HE WAS NO LONGER A MAN he became the second to God because he was the son of God even before he descended Where is that written? This is what is written: 1 Timothy 2:5 King James Version (KJV) 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; K you are slow to understand ;that scriptures for us men will be valid until all what Christ sacrifice stand for as been done ,just as he will remain THE LAMB OF GOD ,but that does not mean that his life in heaven is pursuit in the flesh ,we all know that flesh can not live in heaven right do you see any astronaut going in space in his shirt, running shoes and a pair of sun glasses wen Christ ascend he still was clothed with a tunic ,this is not what is needed in space traveling ,so it is understand that from the moment he disappeared from view he also changed physically  into his spirit body, do you have a problem with this T, I know some speculate that Jesus transformed into a spirit after entering the clouds.  Scripture does not teach us that. I know that the flesh and blood, which is the mortal tent, will not inherit either the new earth or the new heaven; 1 Corinthians 15:50, but I also know that time will be cut short so that flesh, which is the soul's tent, will be saved; Matthew 24:22 and Mark 13:20. Claiming that no flesh will be saved because flesh and blood cannot enter the Reign of God breaks Scripture, Matthew 24:22 and Mark 13:20. Claiming there are two different types of flesh does not as it is written “All flesh is not the same flesh”, 1 Corinthians 15:39. We are taught these things and that the human Jesus Christ, who shares in our humanity, mediates between us and Jehovah.

K

1Co 15:35 But someone may ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?”
1Co 15:36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.
1Co 15:37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else.
1Co 15:38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body.
1Co 15:39 All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another.

in those verse Paul just answer a question to explain that the flesh body is only A COVER to the soul ,and that this cover can be changed if God so want it ,

1Co 15:42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable;
1Co 15:43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power;
1Co 15:44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

those scriptures are Paul description that the kind of body you can receive if you are called to heaven ,A SPIRITUAL BODY, this is the same body that Christ and those living in heaven possessing as a cover for their soul.

Quote

Claiming there are two different types of flesh does not as it is written “All flesh is not the same flesh”, 1 Corinthians 15:39.

NOW THIS IS A FALSE CLAIM ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURES ON YOUR PART

1Co 15:39 All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another.

PAUL MENTION AT THE LEAST FOUR (4) DIFFERENT KIND OF FLESH

[2besee]

Quote (abe @ Jan. 08 2013,09:16)

Hi, I have a question? The Kingdom of God is in the future? We now live in the Kingdom of the Heavens? Matt.13:47       The Kingdom of the Heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind,           :48        which, when it was full, they drew to shore; and they sat down and gathered the good into vessels, but threw the bad away. We are not there YET. Peace.

I agree.

In the new kingdom, there will be no more sadness, no more suffering….

[2besee]

Hi all,

I have read through your posts, thank you, and was thinking.
Anything seems to be open to any, and various interpretations.

I did a list of things that I am certain of, without any shadow of a doubt as to the interpretation of various verses and beliefs:

• I believe without doubt that there is a God.
• I believe without doubt that God is love. This divine love includes discipline, and many things.
• I believe without doubt that God speaks to us through the Scriptures, Old and New.
• I believe without doubt that God does not tolerate sin.
• I believe without doubt that God favors true justice.
• I believe without doubt that god knows everything about everyone.
• I believe without doubt that “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
• I believe without doubt that Jesus existed.
• I believe without doubt that Jesus was crucified, died, and was risen from the dead.
• I believe without doubt that the day of the Lord (The return of Jesus) will come, “burning like an oven”, and you either survive, or you don't.
• I believe without doubt that we have entered critical times hard to deal with and are in an end day spiritual battle.

I believe many things, but I am talking about things that I believe without “any doubt” as to the interpretation of.

So I believe without doubt that the Word was with God and the Word was God.
Anything further than that I am not certain, I am seeking and learning as I go.

Just saying  

———————————————

Hi Mike

Quote

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but the only begotten god (or son – depending on which Greek ms you use), who is at the Father’s side, has made him known……

Quote

2.  Do you prefer a reading of “only begotten god”, or “only begotten son”, in verse 18?  (Both readings are supported by important Greek mss, so I am happy to use your choice for this exercise.)

Okay, the Greek is:

http://biblos.com/john/1-18.htm

God
no one
has seen
ever yet
only-begotten
God
the
is
in
the
bossom
of
the father,
he
declared.

Quote

In verse 18, is John still talking about the Word from verse one?  YES or NO?

No, it is talking about Jesus.?

[terraricca]

Quote (2besee @ Jan. 11 2013,04:35)

Hi all, I have read through your posts, thank you, and was thinking. Anything seems to be open to any, and various interpretations. I did a list of things that I am certain of, without any shadow of a doubt as to the interpretation of various verses and beliefs: I believe without doubt that there is a God. I believe without doubt that God is love. This divine love includes discipline, and many things. I believe without doubt that God speaks to us through the Scriptures, Old and New. I believe without doubt that God does not tolerate sin. I believe without doubt that God favors true justice. I believe without doubt that god knows everything about everyone. I believe without doubt that “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. I believe without doubt that Jesus existed. I believe without doubt that Jesus was crucified, died, and was risen from the dead. I believe without doubt that the day of the Lord (The return of Jesus) will come, “burning like an oven”, and you either survive, or you don't. I believe without doubt that we have entered critical times hard to deal with and are in an end day spiritual battle. I believe many things, but I am talking about things that I believe without “any doubt” as to the interpretation of. So I believe without doubt that the Word was with God and the Word was God. Anything further than that I am not certain, I am seeking and learning as I go. Just saying   ——————————————— Hi Mike Quote John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but the only begotten god (or son – depending on which Greek ms you use), who is at the Father’s side, has made him known…… Quote 2.  Do you prefer a reading of “only begotten god”, or “only begotten son”, in verse 18?  (Both readings are supported by important Greek mss, so I am happy to use your choice for this exercise.) Okay, the Greek is: http://biblos.com/john/1-18.htm God no one has seen ever yet only-begotten God the is in the bossom of the father, he declared. Quote In verse 18, is John still talking about the Word from verse one?  YES or NO? No, it is talking about Jesus.?

2bb

Quote

I believe many things, but I am talking about things that I believe without “any doubt” as to the interpretation of.

I am glad you did not specify to be TRUTHS just things you believe to be and do not doubt about it ,and so it allows you to change them wen time comes to do so

[mikeboll64]

Quote (2besee @ Jan. 10 2013,16:35)

Quote (mikeboll @ 64) In verse 18, is John still talking about the Word from verse one?  YES or NO? No, it is talking about Jesus.

Hi 2B,

Thank you for your answer.

I understand that you like Biblos.com, and base much of your Greek understanding on that site.  (I like it also, and use it almost daily.)  I want you to know that there is much debate over whether the original Greek words John wrote were “monogenes huios” (only begotten son), or “monogenes theos” (only begotten god).  The site you linked has translated ONE Greek manuscript – and that particular ms has “monogenes theos” (only begotten god).  But just because they chose to use THAT PARTICULAR ms for their site doesn't mean that “monogenes theos” are the words John actually wrote in 1:18.  Like I said before, there are many important Greek mss that have “monogenes theos”, and there are many other important Greek mss that have “monogenes huios” (only begotten son).

I suggest that before you side with Biblos.com, you at least read some information from NETNotes, so you can make an informed decision.

If you click on footnote #1 in the NET translation on this site, you can read a WHOLE LOT of information about it.  (Make sure you click on the “thumb tack”, or the info will keep disappearing.)  

I will post just a snippet of what the footnote says:

The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh” qeo”, “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh” Juio”, “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss………….

The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός (only begotten god).

Internally, although υἱός (son) fits the immediate context more readily, θεός (god) is much more difficult.

Scholars always lean towards the more difficult wording, because they believe no scribe would change an easy reading to a difficult one, and therefore, the more difficult reading is usually the original one.

There is a boat-load of info in that footnote, and I think you should look at it before “settling” with the ms that Biblos.com used.

(Look at it this way:  If you prefer “only begotten god”, like you've so far indicated, you are making my job way easier.   )

[mikeboll64]

Quote (2besee @ Jan. 10 2013,16:35)

Quote (mikeboll @ 64) 2.  Do you prefer a reading of “only begotten god”, or “only begotten son”, in verse 18? Okay, the Greek is: http://biblos.com/john/1-18.htm God no one has seen ever yet only-begotten God the is in the bossom of the father, he declared.

The word “ho”, that I've bolded and supersized in your quote, is the definite article, and is often translated as “the” –  but it depends on the context.

Here is the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, from the same site you used:

ho
the, this, that, one, he, she, it

Including the feminine he (hay), and the neuter to (to) in all their inflections; the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom) — the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.

So, since the context does dictate in this case, let's change “the” in your list to “that”.  Now it says:

God no one has seen ever yet  =  No one has ever seen God.

only-begotten god that is in the bosom of the father, he declared  =  The only begotten god, that is in the bosom of the Father, he [is the one that has] declared [the Father to us].

This is how the NWT has it:
John 1:18 
No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him.

Can we go with that translation?  I will wait until I hear back from you about “theos” or “huios”.  Then I can begin to present my case to you.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (abe @ Jan. 07 2013,14:16)

We are not there YET.

Agreed, Abe.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 24 2012,11:07)

Regarding many Gods; yes there are many,many gods,but all are dead gods invented by men by the craftiness of satan. Some even consider a tree as god,but their god. God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. There is only one genuine God,the rest are introduced gods. The mongkey is also considered god by some.King Herod back then, was considered as a god.

This is false Wakeup.

There are many legit gods that are not false and are not introduced.

Theos and Elohim are not exclusive titles for YHWH. They are also correctly applied to angels and judges.

Satan is even legitimately called the god of this age. He truly is a god of something and he is also the Father of things too.

Many (especially Trinitarians) are not aware of the wide usage of theos and elohim.

[Ed J]

Quote (2besee @ Jan. 11 2013,09:35)

Hi all, I believe without doubt that the day of the Lord (The return of Jesus) will come, “burning like an oven”, and you either

Hi 2Besee,

“The Day of the LORD” means “The Day of YHVH”. Which is the “Feast of Tabernacles”.

---

“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;” (1 Cor 15:50)

  We all had Adams blood, but the blood of Christ cleanses us.

(The Passover) (Lev.17:11) For the life of the flesh is in the blood:
and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement
for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

(The Passover) 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
(Pentecost) 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
(Feast of Tabernacles) 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God,
even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. (1 Cor 15:22-24)

              Thy Kingdom Come , thy will be done
                    (Pentecost)      (Feast of Tabernacles)

Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying,
The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our LORD(YHVH),
and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 11 2013,11:24)

(Look at it this way:  If you prefer “only begotten god”, like you've so far indicated, you are making my job way easier.   )

Mike……….Can't you see you are dwelling on something that can be taken different way, and forcing it to meet your rendition of what you want it to say.

Why not Just look for other scriptures that would clearify it for you. Here is what i mean, if i had a problem with knowing if there is other God's i can find other scriptures Where God himself said he looked for other Gods and found none and where he said severial time there is NO OTHER Gods Besides HIM, and even go to where Jesus said , for thou art the “ONLY” “TRUE” God. Now if Jessu said “only” then that means there are no others, and if He also said “TRUE GOD” then all others and NOT “TRUE” GODS. So the question is, is the God you believe is a God, a REAL GOD or a FALSE God. Jesus said there is “ONLY (ONE) “TRUE” GOD. So that leaves only “FALSE” God's left. Paul said cleary there are Many “SO-CALLED” God's but unto us ther is ONLY ONE GOD.

My question to you how can you simply discard those scriptures as if they simply do not exist.

peace and love to you and yours…………………………….gene

[Ed J]

Good post Gene!

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[kerwin]

Mike, 2beesee,

The NIV states the following.

John 1:18
New International Version (NIV)

18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[a] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

Footnotes:

   John 1:18 Some manuscripts but the only Son, who

I can see where the Greek may be translated as such though from what you write the word “Son” is not explicitly written.  Believing as I do that this verse is speaking of the Spirit and that the Spirit is a part of God, either one is fine.

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 11 2013,06:44)

Quote (2besee @ Jan. 10 2013,16:35) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) 2.  Do you prefer a reading of “only begotten god”, or “only begotten son”, in verse 18? Okay, the Greek is: http://biblos.com/john/1-18.htm God no one has seen ever yet only-begotten God the is in the bossom of the father, he declared. The word “ho”, that I've bolded and supersized in your quote, is the definite article, and is often translated as “the” –  but it depends on the context. Here is the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, from the same site you used: ho the, this, that, one, he, she, it Including the feminine he (hay), and the neuter to (to) in all their inflections; the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom) — the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc. So, since the context does dictate in this case, let's change “the” in your list to “that”.  Now it says: God no one has seen ever yet  =  No one has ever seen God. only-begotten god that is in the bosom of the father, he declared  =  The only begotten god, that is in the bosom of the Father, he [is the one that has] declared [the Father to us]. This is how the NWT has it: John 1:18  No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him. Can we go with that translation?  I will wait until I hear back from you about “theos” or “huios”.  Then I can begin to present my case to you.

Mike,

I believe “ho” and a number of other words depending on the function they serve is the sentence simply mean “who” as in this is the man, who is Mike Boll. I am of the opinion that various translators do not believe the Ancient Greek usage of it translates to English that well and so use the other words you cite as better alternatives. In verse 18 some translators do use “who”, the NIV for example.

[Ed J]

Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 12 2013,02:35)

Mike, 2beesee, The NIV states the following. John 1:18 New International Version (NIV) 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[a] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known. Footnotes:    John 1:18 Some manuscripts but the only Son, who I can see where the Greek may be translated as such though from what you write the word “Son” is not explicitly written.  Believing as I do that this verse is speaking of the Spirit and that the Spirit is a part of God, either one is fine.

Hi Kerwin, there is no such thing as 'a begotten god'?

It is only in the corrupted versions of the Greek.  (Link)

John 1:18 θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε ο μονογενης υιος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο

This is the Greek word for God: θεον
This is the Greek word for son: υιος

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[2besee]

Hi all, my apologies, I am getting to this.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 11 2013,09:26)

My question to you how can you simply discard those scriptures as if they simply do not exist.

Hi Gene,

My question to you is the same one I've asked for over a year:  How in the world could Jehovah ever have the title “The God OF gods” if He is literally the ONLY god in existence?

I have even set up a thread to discuss this issue, but it seems you guys don't really want to know the scriptural truth of the matter, because you all just keep running away from the thread. Read my last post in this thread.  I will await your comments there.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 11 2013,09:35)

I can see where the Greek may be translated as such though from what you write the word “Son” is not explicitly written.

Hi Kerwin,

You need to delve a little deeper.  In some Greek mss, the words are “monogenes theos” (only begotten god), and in other Greek mss, the words are “monogenes huios” (only begotten son).

What the NIV (and many other Trinitarian translations) now do is this:

They put the word “theos” in front of the word “monogenes”, making it say “God, the only begotten”.  

But instead of translating “monogenes” as “only begotten”, they translate it as “one and only”, making it say, “God, the one and only”.  

Then, they ADD the word “son” after “monogenes”, making it say “God, the one and only Son”.

Don't be fooled by their trickery, Kerwin. The two choices are simply “monogenes theos”, or “monogenes huios”.  

Which one do you think John actually wrote?

[Author]

Posts