- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 5 hours ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 12 2012,21:08) mike, you are insisting individual being in phil 2.6
can you read any translation that says individual being in phil 2.6
ill wait mike
Actually, you might want to read my post again, jammin. I didn't “insist” on anything. I asked YOU what YOU think Paul meant by the word “God” in Phil 2, and then offered MY opinion that he was referring to an indivual being instead of to a species of beings.What do YOU think he was referring to?
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 12 2012,21:06) tnx for answering that you and your father have THE SAME NATURE AND THAT IS YOUR HUMAN NATURE. why cant you accept that Christ has the same nature just like his father.
I do accept that Christ has the same SPIRIT nature as his Father and God, Jehovah.Why can't YOU accept that if someone has the same nature AS someone ELSE, then that first someone can't possibly BE that someone ELSE?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:09) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 12 2012,20:45) Is this verse not speaking of Herod's intentions? “intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.” (Acts 12:4)
God bless
Ed J
Well,If Luke, who wrote Acts, was intending to say that Herod was going to bring Peter out after HE was done celebrating Easter, then Luke most likely would have used a Greek word that MEANT “Easter”. Instead, he used the Greek word that meant “Passover”, and so was obviously referring to Herod (who pretended to be a faithful Jew to appease the Jews) bringing Peter out after the PASSOVER celebration was finished.
Use your Google translator and tell us all what Greek word means “Easter”.
And then ask yourself why you would spend so much time and effort trying to defend a mistranslated word in one of many English Bibles. Because the bottom line is that it doesn't really matter what any of us THINK was meant – it only matters that the Greek word used was “pascha”, and that word means “passover”.
I'm starting to get the feeling that some of you guys hold the KJV up as another god or something. It is simply one of THOUSANDS of English translations of the scriptures. There is nothing special or magical or spiritual about this particular translation, Ed. In fact, it has many flaws.
ΠάσχαQuote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,14:25) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:09) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 12 2012,20:45) Is this verse not speaking of Herod's intentions? “intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.” (Acts 12:4)
God bless
Ed J
Well,If Luke, who wrote Acts, was intending to say that Herod was going to bring Peter out after HE was done celebrating Easter, then Luke most likely would have used a Greek word that MEANT “Easter”. Instead, he used the Greek word that meant “Passover”, and so was obviously referring to Herod (who pretended to be a faithful Jew to appease the Jews) bringing Peter out after the PASSOVER celebration was finished.
Use your Google translator and tell us all what Greek word means “Easter”.
And then ask yourself why you would spend so much time and effort trying to defend a mistranslated word in one of many English Bibles. Because the bottom line is that it doesn't really matter what any of us THINK was meant – it only matters that the Greek word used was “pascha”, and that word means “passover”.
I'm starting to get the feeling that some of you guys hold the KJV up as another god or something. It is simply one of THOUSANDS of English translations of the scriptures. There is nothing special or magical or spiritual about this particular translation, Ed. In fact, it has many flaws.
ΠάσχαWell,
We've learned something new today. Ed, try this site.
You have the choice of current Greek or ancient Greek. When I put the word “easter” in the current Greek, it comes up with “pascha”. But when I check the ancient Greek box, there are no matches.
Also, on the Greek to English side, you can use the Roman transliteration, so I put in “pascha” and got “easter” in the current Greek. But when I check the ancient Greek box, the result is “passover”, not “easter”.
So, do you suppose the NT scriptures were written in current Greek? Or ancient Greek?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:14) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 12 2012,20:47) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,13:41)
So you're saying that when the AKJV Bible Society translated the scriptures into, say, Spanish, they didn't use the Hebrew and Greek texts, but just re-translated their English translation into Spanish?Are you sure?
Hi Mike,I believe that is the case.
God bless
Ed J
Hmmmm………..That simply doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps you should check into it and find out the truth before making the claim?
Not interested: Perhaps you should check into it instead.mike
Quote I'm starting to get the feeling that some of you guys hold the KJV up as another god or something. It is simply one of THOUSANDS of English translations of the scriptures. There is nothing special or magical or spiritual about this particular translation, Ed. In fact, it has many flaws. I had that feeling for a while now glad to see you can feel it as well,:)
they do not trust Gods word to make them see the truth from within ,how then can they believe in God
Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 13 2012,15:35) they do not trust Gods word
PIERRE,Please explain what exactly YOU mean here?
Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,15:41) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 13 2012,15:35) they do not trust Gods word
PIERRE,Please explain what exactly YOU mean here?
EDJ.The answer is simple; they can not comprehend the wicked ness of satan,that he has corrupted mankind more and more in these last days.
Man has become more crafty,spiritually.And most of all satan has rewarded these bible translaters with good lump sums of money.
The kjv has a special uniquenes,in the lingo.
wakeup.
Hi Wakeuop,
Clearly they don't know what steps it took to get God's word in English.
Your brother
in Christ, Jesus.
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
holycitybiblecode.orgEd wrote:[/quote]
Quote I believe we were all pre-existent Angels; all accept Jesus that is. Edj
you did not understand my question!!
HERE IT IS AGAIN”:
What were we,before creation ever existed?
BEFORE THE ENTIRE CREATION EVER EXISTED???
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (carmel @ Aug. 13 2012,17:37) Ed wrote:[/quote]
Quote I believe we were all pre-existent Angels; all accept Jesus that is. Edj
you did not understand my question!!
HERE IT IS AGAIN”:
What were we,before creation ever existed?
BEFORE THE ENTIRE CREATION EVER EXISTED???
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
AngelsQuote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:16) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 12 2012,21:08) mike, you are insisting individual being in phil 2.6
can you read any translation that says individual being in phil 2.6
ill wait mike
Actually, you might want to read my post again, jammin. I didn't “insist” on anything. I asked YOU what YOU think Paul meant by the word “God” in Phil 2, and then offered MY opinion that he was referring to an indivual being instead of to a species of beings.What do YOU think he was referring to?
i said phil 2.6 talks about nature or form
..therefore your question is wrong but you keep on asking.
now im giving you freedom to post your illusiongive me a translation that says in phil 2.6 that it is a species or individual being.
can you give me one?? yes or no?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:20) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 12 2012,21:06) tnx for answering that you and your father have THE SAME NATURE AND THAT IS YOUR HUMAN NATURE. why cant you accept that Christ has the same nature just like his father.
I do accept that Christ has the same SPIRIT nature as his Father and God, Jehovah.Why can't YOU accept that if someone has the same nature AS someone ELSE, then that first someone can't possibly BE that someone ELSE?
you are telling not the whole truth boy.what we can read in the bible is
Philippians 2:6
Amplified Bible (AMP)
6 Who, although being essentially one with God and in the form of God [[a]possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God],
believe it or not
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 13 2012,01:53) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 12 2012,17:01) Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 12 2012,16:11) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 12 2012,23:08) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 11 2012,10:20) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 09 2012,23:39) mike, God is nature according to paul phil 2.6
if the bible says nature or form then you must stick to the term.make your own bible and make it species
First of all jammin,I don't believe Paul is talking about a species when he writes the word “God” in Phil 2:6. I believe Paul is referring to an INDIVIDUAL BEING that we all know as “God”.
Secondly, there are no words in Phil 2:6 that say “God is nature”. I don't know where you're even getting that from.
Phil 2 says that Jesus was existing in the form OF God.
jammin, whose form was Jesus existing in? Was he existing in the form of a species known as “God”? Or in the form of an individual being known as “God”? Which one, please?
(It's not that hard of a question, jammin. Surely you are capable of answering it after all this time, right? My answer is: AN INDIVIDUAL BEING. What's yours?)
Mike,You are talking to Jammin? a machine?,.. a talking machine. It will talk based with it's programs. Limited to what the I.C. Brain input.
ARE YOU SURE IT IS NOT A BROKEN MACHINE ???because it keep repeating it self constantly ,like it is stuck on some little words or so
Terrica,Broken talking machine? may be more than a broken talking machine. God is a nature? really broken machine
Jammin is a really broken talking machine! not good to deal with him.
bec you cant answer my question, you are acting like a child boy.
talk to your minister and study hard.next time do not use NLT for your false doctrine. you believe that Christ is not God and you are using NLT to support your illusion but NLT does not supprt your imagination boy.
NLT believes that Christ is God
better luck next time
JAMMIN,Are you crazy? You did not see my answer? browse and read IT back. YOU ARE THE ONE CAN NOT ABLE TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS! Mr. Broken Machine, shut-up!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,12:42) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 12 2012,18:07) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,02:17) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 11 2012,20:23) paul did not say form of nature.
I agree.Paul said “form of God“, right? And what did Paul mean by “God”? Did he mean a species of beings? Or did he mean an individual being?
Hi Mike,How many times has Jammin 'ignored' this question now?
God bless
Ed J
Oh, about 97 times, I'd guess.
(Probably more like 12)But jammin apparently can't be bothered with OUR questions, because he's too busy asking more and more of his own.
Mike,Jammin, is a programmed broken machine. What did you expect with a broken machine?
limjunus,
that is the best thing that you can do boy..
dont you have any common sense boy?? LOL
you are using NLT to prove that Christ is not God but your favorte version says he is God.
go to school first and study logic and common sense boy LOL
mikeboll64,Aug. wrote:[/quote]
Quote So God was of no use to Noah? Or Abraham? Or Moses? Or David? Sorry Charlie – no sale.
Mike,
Your eagerness to confront me destroyed you.
This is what I said:
IT IS A FACT THAT THE ISRAELITES NEVER ACCEPTED AN INVISIBLE UNKNOWN GOD. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ELECTS.
So all those names which you mentioned are among the ELEECTS.
As you know there were two generations, according to scriptures, one of heaven, and one of earth.
Genesis 2: These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth:
The one of heaven, was the HOLY line which was needed to create the genealogy of Mary, the Prophets and other holy people, which commenced in ABEL,AND WAS FOLOWED BY SETH, since Abel was killed. This Generation was only possible through the intervention by the HOLY SPIRIT, and if you notice, Seth was born when Adam was 130 years, so it was definitely through the Holy Spirit, and not through nature.
Notice also that apart Seth Adam had other SONS AND DAUGHTERS and these were also the generations of heaven through Adam, but were not holy people since they were born through sinful nature. Cain was the head of the generations of Satan, evil spirits born in man.
As you can read it says: “And Cain went out from the face of the Lord” So Cain is not considered one from the BOOK OF THE GENERATIONS OF ADAM. And these were the generations of sinful earth US.THE GENTILES.
Genesis 4: And Cain went out from the face of the Lord, and dwelt as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden.
mikeboll64,Aug. wrote:[/quote]
Quote So God was of no use to Noah? Or Abraham? Or Moses? Or David? Sorry Charlie – no sale.
Mike,
Your eagerness to confront me destroyed you.
This is what I said:
IT IS A FACT THAT THE ISRAELITES NEVER ACCEPTED AN INVISIBLE UNKNOWN GOD. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ELECTS.
So all those names which you mentioned are among the ELEECTS.
As you know there were two generations, according to scriptures, one of heaven, and one of earth.Although this is also a referrence to the FLESH through earth,and SOULS through Jesus' Spirit.
Genesis 2: These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth:
The one of heaven, was the HOLY line which was needed to create the genealogy of Mary, the Prophets and other holy people, which commenced in ABEL,AND WAS FOLOWED BY SETH, since Abel was killed. This Generation was only possible through the intervention by the HOLY SPIRIT, and if you notice, Seth was born when Eve was 130 years, so it was definitely through the Holy Spirit, and not through nature.
Notice also that apart Seth Adam had other SONS AND DAUGHTERS and these were also the generations of heaven through Adam, but were not holy people since they were born through sinful nature. Cain was the head of the generations of Satan, evil spirits born in man.
As you can read it says: “And Cain went out from the face of the Lord” So Cain is not considered as one from the BOOK OF THE GENERATIONS OF ADAM. And these were the generations of sinful earth US.THE GENTILES.
Genesis 4: And Cain went out from the face of the Lord, and dwelt as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden.
The Holy line, since they were born of God, were never possessed by Satan’s spirit within their souls, for the simple reason that Satan had dominion over those who were born through nature.
So in fact there were three generations not two, but scripture mentions only those who were in the BOOK OF THE GENERATIONS OF ADAM.
1 This is the book of the generation of Adam. In the day that God created man, he made him to the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female; and blessed them: and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created
Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son to his own image and likeness, (THERFORE SON OF GOD) and called his name Seth.
Now the name Seth means APPOINTED.
5:4 And the days of Adam, after he begot Seth, were eight hundred years: and he begot sons and daughters
So for God the Book started through SETH. And definitely , all the sons and daughters which Adam had were through other wives. So Seth was the FIRST and LAST WHICH EVE HAD IN RESPECT TO THE BOOK OF THE GENERATIONS OF HEAVEN BY ADAM!!!
Genesis 4: 25 Adam also knew his wife again: and she brought forth a son, and called his name Seth, saying: God hath given me another seed, for Abel whom Cain slew.
Notice: hath given me another seed, for Abel whom Cain slew. So Eve made us aware that God had given her ANOTHER SEED FOR ABEL. Which means the same seed like Abel’s. WHICH WAS BORN THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT. since after 130 years.
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
