- This topic has 25,906 replies, 115 voices, and was last updated 13 hours, 55 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 28 2010,12:58) Hi MB,
If you would know about manuscript variation look up the scripture in the NIV version on the bible lookup of this site.If you would find supporting verses look them up on the NASB version
Thanks Nick,Or you can use the Online Bible Study Tools site that I gave the link to a couple of posts ago, and compare 30 different translations at once.
mike
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 28 2010,13:27) Hi MB,
Translations depend on manuscript choices.
They differ.
Just read the green print, Nick.Quote (Oxy @ June 27 2010,18:27) Haven't I heard? Of course I've heard. What's your point?
Well Oxy, you said:Quote Jesus is the only begotten of the Father, but we who have received Christ have been grafted into the vine so that we may be joint heirs with the Son, also sons of God, born of the Spirit. Shouldn't you have changed the words I bolded with “unique” and “of”?
mike
Quote (RokkaMan @ June 28 2010,09:26) I think this “unique” stuff is of the spirit of The Anti-Christ.
Amen RM!mike
Quote (RokkaMan @ June 28 2010,10:06) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 28 2010,09:30) Hi RM,
If you love God wou will love the Son born of Him.[1Jn5]
And you will love his brothers born in the same way
When the bible says Jesus is The Only Begotten of The Father.That's exactly what it means.
No other man can be born in the same way.
Where do you get this garbage?
Again, Amen!Hi MB,
Bibles are translated from DIFFERENT manuscripts.
The KJV type ones chose the commonest but perhaps the most recent.
The others used different choices some choosing older ones that are less common-wisdom is requiredQuote (mikeboll64 @ June 28 2010,06:54) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 28 2010,11:47) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 28 2010,05:30) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 28 2010,07:21) Now that where we are right now from what i know to agree about the “fullness” or not.
im not argueing at this moment that Jesus is God or not,
we are talking about the fullness. onced this is over than we can continue a new point.
Hi Dennison,I know I went in another direction, but it wasn't to distract or avoid. It was just to show how we can come to a better understanding of what was said in one scripture from what is said in others. I was trying to link the Father from 2:9 to 1:19 by example. But you didn't buy that link. Okay. Tell me exactly how you equivolate “all fullness” with “Jesus is God Almighty” then.
peace and love,
mike
Mike,i did your point by point debate
So what is your take about the refutation i offered.
I told you about the context of ch 1.
and i told you about ch2.
so what now.
Do we agree or not.
or is there more?
we agreed about the greek,
now its either you agree with the conext of ch 1 and agree with the attack that i made on the link you brought up about ch 2 or you refute.
Which is it?for we can move on.
I get what you did. but it doesnt solve the disagreement we have right now. we can get to that point later as it progresses.
Hi Dennison,I do not see anything in chap. 1 that implies Jesus is God Almighty. That is your assertion, right? Point me to what leads you to think it means Jesus must be God.
I just read it again, and I get nothing about Jesus being God. Look at the first few verses. Look at verse 21, which clearly says God (one person) has reconciled you by Christ ( a different person).
mike
Mike!I told you already im not argueing abuot Jesus being God,
i told you, that we are discussing about this FULLNESS that Jesus has.
Why cant you stay on subject,
why do i have to repeat this mike?If we cant agree on this simple aspect than there is no point of going further.
I asked you to agree on these simple terms.didnt you state that if we cant agree or come to terms to the 1 point, that 2 and 3 wont make sense?
remember house of cards?
why are you jumping ahead.
tell me whether you agree about the fullnes or not.
and refute the claims that i already presented.did you just ignore parts of my post again.
Im playing your game now, how come your not playing anymore?again: you agreed to the greek, im still waiting for your reply to the rest.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 28 2010,13:43) Hi MB,
Bibles are translated from DIFFERENT manuscripts.
The KJV type ones chose the commonest but perhaps the most recent.
The others used different choices some choosing older ones that are less common-wisdom is required
Yes Nick,Very enlightening. But my question was:
I don't get you, Nick. Are you saying the text SHOULD read “god”?
mike
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 28 2010,13:51) Mike! I told you already im not argueing abuot Jesus being God,
i told you, that we are discussing about this FULLNESS that Jesus has.
Why cant you stay on subject,
why do i have to repeat this mike?If we cant agree on this simple aspect than there is no point of going further.
I asked you to agree on these simple terms.didnt you state that if we cant agree or come to terms to the 1 point, that 2 and 3 wont make sense?
remember house of cards?
why are you jumping ahead.
tell me whether you agree about the fullnes or not.
and refute the claims that i already presented.did you just ignore parts of my post again.
Im playing your game now, how come your not playing anymore?again: you agreed to the greek, im still waiting for your reply to the rest.
Hi Dennison,I thought your whole point of this was “How could Jesus have ALL FULLNESS and not be God”.
Am I wrong? If so, what do you think ALL FULLNESS means about Jesus? In other words, what is it you are asking of me? Ask a specific question – not just “What do you think of verse 6?”
mike
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 28 2010,13:56) Hi MB,
Labelling others is easy but it might stop you learning from them.
Who did I label?Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 28 2010,07:55) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 28 2010,13:51) Mike! I told you already im not argueing abuot Jesus being God,
i told you, that we are discussing about this FULLNESS that Jesus has.
Why cant you stay on subject,
why do i have to repeat this mike?If we cant agree on this simple aspect than there is no point of going further.
I asked you to agree on these simple terms.didnt you state that if we cant agree or come to terms to the 1 point, that 2 and 3 wont make sense?
remember house of cards?
why are you jumping ahead.
tell me whether you agree about the fullnes or not.
and refute the claims that i already presented.did you just ignore parts of my post again.
Im playing your game now, how come your not playing anymore?again: you agreed to the greek, im still waiting for your reply to the rest.
Hi Dennison,I thought your whole point of this was “How could Jesus have ALL FULLNESS and not be God”.
Am I wrong? If so, what do you think ALL FULLNESS means about Jesus? In other words, what is it you are asking of me? Ask a specific question – not just “What do you think of verse 6?”
mike
Mike are you serious!!!!I limited myself to one point and your acting like i forgot everything that was posted before!!!
This all started on page 9 of the thread.Where i attacked Gene, and you defended him ignorantly to what i was reffering to.
yes this is my point, but if we do not understand what FULLNESS IS. than nothing else matters.
IF Jesus Christ is everything to us, who is life, and who is everything. Than how can we say he is not God.
YOUR STARTING EVERYTHING OVER. we had a roll going.
anyways!!! i told you already,
my refutations!!! that ch1. speaks about a General Fullness of all life and power!
and that Ch2. does not define ch1 as acceptable context!What say you!!
do you AGREE OR NOT!!!Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 28 2010,14:12) yes this is my point, but if we do not understand what FULLNESS IS. than nothing else matters. IF Jesus Christ is everything to us, who is life, and who is everything. Than how can we say he is not God.
YOUR STARTING EVERYTHING OVER. we had a roll going.
anyways!!! i told you already,
my refutations!!! that ch1. speaks about a General Fullness of all life and power!
and that Ch2. does not define ch1 as acceptable context!What say you!!
do you AGREE OR NOT!!!
Simmer down there, son. I already said I DON'T agree they are unrelated, BUT……let's go with your view, since that IS what the Greek says.
You said:
Quote IF Jesus Christ is everything to us, who is life, and who is everything. Than how can we say he is not God. Very simple, Dennison. Jesus Christ is the one who told us there is only one true God – and that is the Father alone. He tells us that the Father is both our God and his God. Even after he was raised, he still calls the Father “my God”.
You know this stuff, right? Bottom line is (again), no, I don't see anything in Col 1 or 2 that makes me want to worship Jesus as my God. What else ya got?
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 28 2010,08:20) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 28 2010,14:12) yes this is my point, but if we do not understand what FULLNESS IS. than nothing else matters. IF Jesus Christ is everything to us, who is life, and who is everything. Than how can we say he is not God.
YOUR STARTING EVERYTHING OVER. we had a roll going.
anyways!!! i told you already,
my refutations!!! that ch1. speaks about a General Fullness of all life and power!
and that Ch2. does not define ch1 as acceptable context!What say you!!
do you AGREE OR NOT!!!
Simmer down there, son. I already said I DON'T agree they are unrelated, BUT……let's go with your view, since that IS what the Greek says.
You said:
Quote IF Jesus Christ is everything to us, who is life, and who is everything. Than how can we say he is not God. Very simple, Dennison. Jesus Christ is the one who told us there is only one true God – and that is the Father alone. He tells us that the Father is both our God and his God. Even after he was raised, he still calls the Father “my God”.
You know this stuff, right? Bottom line is (again), no, I don't see anything in Col 1 or 2 that makes me want to worship Jesus as my God. What else ya got?
mike
lol mike,its amazing how you refuse to admit that your wrong about collosians.
Its a general fulllness.
and we were dicussing your “logic” which was ur orginal refutation.
now your logic is gone.and now we are resorting to a new point.
Fine.You stated many points in that one lil post.
1)Jesus Christ spoke of the one True God,
2) the Father is alone,
3)Even after the ressurection Jesus calls the father my God.lol you already worship Jesus. and no other god should be worshiped but the one true God.
anyways if we can go back to the subject in hand.
The fullnes of Christ means he was full of everything before flesh.
My orginal point is that because he had this general fulllness and the is the LIGHT, WORD, LIFE, POWER, literally, than he we can breath because of him.in other words Jesus is the source of life?
agree or disagree?you said you LOVE point by point. I can obliged unlike others, and im willing to play your circle of games, but i will not allow you to cut corners.
So you agree or disagree that Jesus is everything to us, the source of life?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 28 2010,12:45) Hi All, The Greek of 1 Tim 3:16 doesn't have the word “god” in it. At least the MSS used by the NWT and Online Bible Study Tools. The word is “hos”, which means “who”.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/interli….6&t=kjv
peace and love,
mike
Apparently all the translations understood the meaning and context of hos was God himself even if God wasn't used in greek.To further affirm, if you use the same website tool used to dissect the meaning of John 1:1….
It implies that The Word or Hos, as you have provided… IS God.
According to what YOU have provided… Hos is also translated as The Word of God.
And According to what YOU have provided, the same site shows Hos = The Word of God = and The Word of God = Lovgos which = YHVH.
So according to what YOU have provided
which is: http://www.biblestudytools.com/interlinear-bible/1 timothy 3:16 still accurately depicts that the word Hos, meaning which or who, actually still refers to YHVH and that is the person in reference.
So according to what YOU have provided, it was YHVH or God or Lovgos or Hos, that was manifested as flesh.
Thanks for tool, but you were inaccurate in using the tool/interpretation.
It further backs up the mondern day translations.
God I love my KJV!Why listen to anything Nick Hassan says? he's effectively proven he's a biblical heretic.
He picks and chooses scripture, he dwells in the spirit of the anti-christ.
And he doesn't read any of the scripture he supplies to support his ideas because so far, 100% of the scripture he's supplied that i've checked, do not support his ideas nor does it say what he professes it says.
He twists scripture to fit his cause, but when you research it, they don't say what he says it says.
——
Why waste our times further dealing with the likes of him.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
