- This topic has 3,161 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (2besee @ Jan. 30 2013,14:13) unto however the Son, the throne of you, O God, to the ages (*aionos) of the ages (*aionos), and the scepter of righteousness the scepter of the kingdom of you. You did love righteousness and did hate lawlessness; because of this, anointed you God, the God of you, with the oil of exultation, above the companions of you. (men)
Please post an English translation of Heb 1:8-9 that you agree with, 2B. Just copying Greek words from Biblos.com – as if that in itself qualifies as the act of translation – is not really getting us anywhere.Post the English version of that passage that you prefer.
Okay, we've begun to discuss Heb 1 and Rev 19. I didn't notice any comments about Joh 17:5. Does that mean you accept it as I quoted it?
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) And if this wasn't enough, let's see what G. Horner really wrote: Bohairic:
In (the) beginning was the Word, and the Word was (imperf.) with God, and God (indef. art.) was the Word.Sahidic:
In the beginning was being the word, and the word was being with God, and [a] God was the word.
As you can see, both of the versions you quoted add the indefinite article. One actually writes “a” in the verse, while the other has “indef. art.” in parenthesis.The other verses you quoted from the Coptic are irrelevant, UNLESS there is a version that says, “the Word was with a God, and the Word was a God”.
Apparently, since only the second “theos” has the indefinite article added, the Coptic writers are considering one as “God”, and the other as “a god”.
All of this is besides the point anyway, Kerwin. I only added that Coptic info as support that “a god” is as possible a translation as “the god”. But you already know this FACT of translation, right?
Can you factually refute the possible translation of “a god” in John 1:1c? YES or NO?
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) Horner translates John 1:16 as: “Because out of fulness we all of us took [a] life and [a] grace in place of [a] grace.”
He also renders John 1:26 as
“I am baptizing you in [a] water”
Just so you know, the Coptic language uses the indefinite article far more than we do in English. Many times, they will use it AS OPPOSED to the definite article “the” – as in the examples you quoted.In other words, if the definite article “the” is NOT to be used, they will add the indefinite article “a” – just to show that the subject is a general one, and not some particular one.
For instance, consider your second example: “I am baptizing you in [a] water”. Since Jesus wasn't talking about any SPECIFIC water, like the water of a particular river or vessel, we in English just say “water”. But for the same reason, Coptic speaking peoples clarify that it wasn't “THE water” by adding the indefinite article – making clear that it wasn't to any particular water that Jesus referred. Now think about why 1:1b has “God” – without the indefinite article – and 1:1c has “a god” – with the indefinite article. Could it be because they know that the one in 1:1b is THE God, and the one in 1:1c is a god (as opposed to THE god)?
Anyway, like I said before, this is a moot point since the FACTS of the matter are that 1:1c can be translated as “God” (by adding the definite article “the”), or as “a god” (by adding the indefinite article “a”).
These are the facts of the matter, Kerwin. The “a god” translation has THE God being WITH another who is called “god” in the beginning. The “God” translation has THE God being WITH THE God in the beginning.
Since we know from scripture that Jesus IS called a god; and we know from scripture that Jesus was with his own God in the beginning, it should be a no-brainer. But I understand that you have personal doctrines to protect.
Quote (2besee @ Jan. 30 2013,16:17) Mike, there are many things that I never posted in that long post……….. but 'part two' will have to wait until I “get back”….Later!
Okay 2B,But remember we are ONLY discussing verse 1 for now. I have offered my scriptural support that fits Jesus. You and Kerwin are now in the process of making a laughable effort to suggest THOSE scriptures also don't say what they clearly say.
It seems this discussion will go on for years. But it might be worth it if I can get you guys to put aside your preconceived, personal wishes, and accept the scriptures as they were written.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 01 2013,06:55) Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) And if this wasn't enough, let's see what G. Horner really wrote: Bohairic:
In (the) beginning was the Word, and the Word was (imperf.) with God, and God (indef. art.) was the Word.Sahidic:
In the beginning was being the word, and the word was being with God, and [a] God was the word.
As you can see, both of the versions you quoted add the indefinite article. One actually writes “a” in the verse, while the other has “indef. art.” in parenthesis.The other verses you quoted from the Coptic are irrelevant, UNLESS there is a version that says, “the Word was with a God, and the Word was a God”.
Apparently, since only the second “theos” has the indefinite article added, the Coptic writers are considering one as “God”, and the other as “a god”.
All of this is besides the point anyway, Kerwin. I only added that Coptic info as support that “a god” is as possible a translation as “the god”. But you already know this FACT of translation, right?
Can you factually refute the possible translation of “a god” in John 1:1c? YES or NO?
Mike,Words allow many interpretations.
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) Where is Jesus called a god in Revelations 19:11-15?
I didn't say Jesus was called a god in the book of Revelation. He is called “the Word of God” in chapter 19 of that book. Do you agree? YES or NO?Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) John 17:5 infers Jesus had glory with Jehovah before God created the earth and that Jesus was not yet glorified with that glory as of his petition in John 17.5.
Incorrect, Kerwin. The words are, “glorify me now with the glory I WAS HAVING with you before the world began”. And the fact that JESUS HIMSELF spoke of a glory HE WAS HAVING before the world began means JESUS HIMSELF was there having that glory.Can you refute the simple logic of that point, Kerwin?
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) 1) Jesus' glory was with Jehovah before the beginning.
Nope. See above. Jesus himself WAS HAVING (had) that glory – according to HIS OWN words.Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) 2) Jesus is called by the name of the Word at the time John sees him in a vision.
Nope. There is NOTHING in the whole of scripture to suggest there is some “being” with the name “the Word of God”, and Jesus was called by THAT BEING'S name in a vision. The whole concept is laugable and nonsensical, Kerwin. It is clear from the comparisons I made in my earlier post (eyes of blazing fire, sword coming out of the mouth, etc.) that the one discussed in Rev 19:11-16 is none other than Jesus Christ. It is NOT clear, from that passage, or any other passage, that Jesus is being called by the name of SOMEONE ELSE.Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) 3) Jesus is called God, but not Jehovah, in Scripture.
AGREED! This one troubles me a little bit, because both you and 2B have already acknowledged the scriptural FACT that Jesus IS called “god” in certain scriptures. Yet here 2B is, trying to make up his own, alternate reading of Heb 1:8-9 – as if he's trying to prove that Jesus ISN'T called “god” in scripture.
I don't get it, since he ALREADY acknowledged that he WAS called “god”. At any rate, it seems that so far we all agree on that one thing.
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) Your three points stand refuted.
And since you and I DO agree that Jesus is called “god” in scripture, you couldn't have possibly refuted all three of my points, Kerwin. In fact, you didn't refute even one of them. Your rebuttals are as follows:1. Jesus IS called a god in scripture (but not “Jehovah”). With this I agree. It is actually what I stated, right? Agreeing with what I wrote is not “refuting” it, Kerwin.
2. John 17:5 is talking about a glory that has been WAITING FOR Jesus since before the world began. That interpretation doesn't actually fit the scripture, since Jesus refers to that glory as “the glory I WAS HAVING before the world began”.
3. Rev 19:13 refers to a DIFFERENT being who is named “the Word of God”, and for some unknown reason, and without even a hint of this in the scripture itself, you have decided that Jesus is being called by the name of this DIFFERENT being, or whatever.
Kerwin, is it possible that “the Word of God” is one of Jesus' many names/titles, and that he is called by this name, among many others, in Rev 19:11-16?
Is it possible that John 17:5 actually DOES speak of a glory Jesus WAS HAVING alongside his God before the world began………. seeing how that's what the words of that scripture actually SAY?
If the answer to either question is “NO”, then please explain which scripture PROHIBITS such an understanding.
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 30 2013,15:34) 1) The Word is made concrete in God, and is with God.
2) The translation of the Word is God is reasonable as God is made flesh by dwelling in those that believe by his Spirit.
1. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me, Kerwin. Is the Word “made concrete IN God”? Or is the Word actually God – as you claim in #2?2. See? Now you're saying the Word actually IS God, and that God is the One who is “made flesh” by dwelling in certain people. But that leaves you with this teaching from John:
In the beginning was God. And God was with God. And God was God.
Does that teaching make sense to you, Kerwin? Or do these words from the NETNote scholars make better sense?
The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”);
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 31 2013,19:34) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 01 2013,06:55)
Can you factually refute the possible translation of “a god” in John 1:1c? YES or NO?
Mike,Words allow many interpretations.
So then, “NO”?Quote (2besee @ Jan. 31 2013,09:17) Mike, there are many things that I never posted in that long post……….. but 'part two' will have to wait until I “get back”….Later!
Hi 2Besee,Where are you getting that stuff from, you need to post the source?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 31 2013,12:07) 2besee……………….A long but very good post brother. My hope is that all will read it completely and think about what you have written and put together for us brother. peace and love to you and yours………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I don't read Long posts of imported words from someone else; and here's why:
A person needs to put their ideas into their own words so they can be held accountable.Because if we scrutinize others words (that they post which are not really theirs),
they can always say 'I didn't write them, why are you scolding me?'So unless they put others ideas (that they agree with) into their own words, I WILL NOT READ THEM!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ Feb. 01 2013,13:20) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 31 2013,12:07) 2besee……………….A long but very good post brother. My hope is that all will read it completely and think about what you have written and put together for us brother. peace and love to you and yours………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I don't read Long posts of imported words from someone else; and here's why:
A person needs to put their ideas into their own words so they can be held accountable.Because if we scrutinize others words (that they post which are not really theirs),
they can always say 'I didn't write them, why are you scolding me?'So unless they put others ideas (that they agree with) into their own words, I WILL NOT READ THEM!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
“SimplyForgiven”(Dennison) has done this very thing with Paul Cohen”, “Victor Havelcheck's” guy. (Link)Quote (Ed J @ Feb. 01 2013,08:20) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 31 2013,12:07) 2besee……………….A long but very good post brother. My hope is that all will read it completely and think about what you have written and put together for us brother. peace and love to you and yours………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I don't read Long posts of imported words from someone else; and here's why:
A person needs to put their ideas into their own words so they can be held accountable.Because if we scrutinize others words (that they post which are not really theirs),
they can always say 'I didn't write them, why are you scolding me?'So unless they put others ideas (that they agree with) into their own words, I WILL NOT READ THEM!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Ed jbut there his also a deeper reason ,and that is that those people do not trust God 's word ,and they feel that their is a better one ,
and so rejecting Christ himself, and his disciples written event including the spirit of truth ,
any one who does not trust in scriptures in who does he believe
Quote (Ed J @ Feb. 01 2013,15:20) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 31 2013,12:07) 2besee……………….A long but very good post brother. My hope is that all will read it completely and think about what you have written and put together for us brother. peace and love to you and yours………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I don't read Long posts of imported words from someone else; and here's why:
A person needs to put their ideas into their own words so they can be held accountable.Because if we scrutinize others words (that they post which are not really theirs),
they can always say 'I didn't write them, why are you scolding me?'So unless they put others ideas (that they agree with) into their own words, I WILL NOT READ THEM!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Ed,What ARE you talking about?
Apart from the quoted scripture, every single word that was in that post and also in every single post apart from three that I have done on this site HAS BEEN MY OWN WORDS. The three or four posts where I quoted someone I said AT FIRST that I was quoting from another site and I gave the source.
Is this a tactic here – discredit someone the moment their backs are turned hoping that they don't see it?
I'm sorry but yesterday the same thing happened elsewhere here (not you).
Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 01 2013,15:49) Quote (Ed J @ Feb. 01 2013,08:20) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 31 2013,12:07) 2besee……………….A long but very good post brother. My hope is that all will read it completely and think about what you have written and put together for us brother. peace and love to you and yours………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I don't read Long posts of imported words from someone else; and here's why:
A person needs to put their ideas into their own words so they can be held accountable.Because if we scrutinize others words (that they post which are not really theirs),
they can always say 'I didn't write them, why are you scolding me?'So unless they put others ideas (that they agree with) into their own words, I WILL NOT READ THEM!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Ed jbut there his also a deeper reason ,and that is that those people do not trust God 's word ,and they feel that their is a better one ,
and so rejecting Christ himself, and his disciples written event including the spirit of truth ,
any one who does not trust in scriptures in who does he believe
Who are “those people” that you are talking about T?How do you judge other believers who do trust in scriptures and do have faith as having no belief?
That is just rude and arrogant.
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Feb. 01 2013,11:03) 2besee…….It was indeed the Spiirt of GOD issuing It's Words through the mouth of Jesus to us all. If that Sprit is in Us it will perforn the same thing in us as it did Jesus. God and His word are one and the same thing. Jesus said the “words” I am telling you are “spirit” and life He also said those words he spoke were not his words But the Words of Him that sent Him, and the one that sent him was God who Jesus said was Spirit , So God the Father was in the Flesh , the flesh man Jesus and God the Father Spoke “HIS WORDS” through the “MAN” Jesus.
You have it right brother, my hope Mike will at least concider this and also Pierre and T8, as well as others too.
peace and love to you and your and thanks for being here brother…………………………..gene
Thanks Gene, my patience is wearing thin today.Quote (2besee @ Feb. 01 2013,09:35) Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 01 2013,15:49) Quote (Ed J @ Feb. 01 2013,08:20) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 31 2013,12:07) 2besee……………….A long but very good post brother. My hope is that all will read it completely and think about what you have written and put together for us brother. peace and love to you and yours………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I don't read Long posts of imported words from someone else; and here's why:
A person needs to put their ideas into their own words so they can be held accountable.Because if we scrutinize others words (that they post which are not really theirs),
they can always say 'I didn't write them, why are you scolding me?'So unless they put others ideas (that they agree with) into their own words, I WILL NOT READ THEM!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Ed jbut there his also a deeper reason ,and that is that those people do not trust God 's word ,and they feel that their is a better one ,
and so rejecting Christ himself, and his disciples written event including the spirit of truth ,
any one who does not trust in scriptures in who does he believe
Who are “those people” that you are talking about T?How do you judge other believers who do trust in scriptures and do have faith as having no belief?
That is just rude and arrogant.
2beeAnyone ,why are you so obset
If you believe in scriptures this is not addressed to you ,right YesAnd why you call me. Arrogant , and rude if what I say is wrong then you may be right , but am I wrong
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 01 2013,14:20) Quote (2besee @ Jan. 30 2013,16:17) Mike, there are many things that I never posted in that long post……….. but 'part two' will have to wait until I “get back”….Later!
Okay 2B,But remember we are ONLY discussing verse 1 for now. I have offered my scriptural support that fits Jesus. You and Kerwin are now in the process of making a laughable effort to suggest THOSE scriptures also don't say what they clearly say.
It seems this discussion will go on for years. But it might be worth it if I can get you guys to put aside your preconceived, personal wishes, and accept the scriptures as they were written.
Mike,
You call our attempts laughable?
The only support that you showed for your rendering of John 1:1 were two or maybe three verses where my support for my rendering and the Bibles rendering of John 1:1 were MANY VERSES, which is why my post was so long — and that was only a part of it. I have more to come.At a later date.
Quote (2besee @ Feb. 01 2013,14:32) Quote (Ed J @ Feb. 01 2013,15:20) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Jan. 31 2013,12:07) 2besee……………….A long but very good post brother. My hope is that all will read it completely and think about what you have written and put together for us brother. peace and love to you and yours………………………………………………………gene
Hi Gene,I don't read Long posts of imported words from someone else; and here's why:
A person needs to put their ideas into their own words so they can be held accountable.Because if we scrutinize others words (that they post which are not really theirs),
they can always say 'I didn't write them, why are you scolding me?'So unless they put others ideas (that they agree with) into their own words, I WILL NOT READ THEM!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Ed,What ARE you talking about?
Apart from the quoted scripture, every single word that was in that post and also in every single post apart from three that I have done on this site HAS BEEN MY OWN WORDS. The three or four posts where I quoted someone I said AT FIRST that I was quoting from another site and I gave the source.
Is this a tactic here – discredit someone the moment their backs are turned hoping that they don't see it?
I'm sorry but yesterday the same thing happened elsewhere here (not you).
Hi 2Besee,OK, sorry, I'll go back and read it then.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
