- This topic has 25,924 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 3 hours ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 18 2012,17:26) jammin,Aug. wrote:[quote=limjunus,Aug. 17 2012,21:21]
jammin,Aug. wrote:mike,
John 1:18 Common English Bible (CEB)
18 No one has ever seen God.
God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made God known.“God, the only Son,” means the only Son of God, who is at the Father's side, has made God known.
Jammin, do not do any alteration of the Bible passages. Better make your own Bible “kiddie boy”.
you are the one who altered the scripture boy.
i think you do not know how to read LOLlet me post again the CEB
John 1:18Common English Bible (CEB)
18 No one has ever seen God.
God the only Son,
who is at the Father’s side,
has made God known.there is no comma after the word God boy> LOL
make your own bible
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 17 2012,19:59) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 18 2012,08:18) jammin, Many mss have “only begotten son” in 1:18, and many others have “only begotten god”. It's hard to tell which one John really wrote, but he definitely called Jesus a god in 1:1, right? So I have no problem with Jesus being a god, just as I have no problem with Satan being “the god of this age”. The word in Biblical times only meant “mighty one”, and was used of Jehovah, Jesus, Satan, angels, and even human beings.
And Jesus most definitely is a “mighty one”, right?
But here's the thing: If we accept “only begotten god” in 1:18, what then? Do you suppose that God Almighty was begotten by anyone at any time? Of course not. So if the Most High God was never begotten, what does it mean that Jesus is the “only BEGOTTEN god”?
If God's nature is “unbegotten”, and Jesus' nature is “begotten”, then you have a problem trying to get us to believe they are somehow “equal”, and even more of a problem trying to convince us that they are the same exact being.
your NWT says a god in john 1.1
but the greek text says was God. not a god boy.study greek
The following information is from the 25 TRINITARIAN scholars of NETNotes:John 1:1c
Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb.jammin, as limjunis has aptly pointed out, it seems your math skills are a little lacking, so let's take this slow.
Can you read in the above information that there are THREE different possible translations of John 1:1c? Here they are:
1. THE God
2. a god
3. god with a qualitative nuanceThis is not someone's opinion, jammin. These are the simple FACTS of the matter when translating the Greek of John 1:1c into English.
Before I move on, it would be nice to see you, Kerwin, Frank, and Ed ACKNOWLEDGE that these are simply FACTS of translation, and no bias has been added up to this point.
If any of you guys think these are NOT the simple FACTS of the matter, then simply refute the information made by these 25 scholars.
IF YOU DO NOT REFUTE THE INFO, THEN I WILL ASSUME IT IS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT REFUTE IT, AND THAT YOU ACCEPT IT AS THE FACTS OF THE MATTER.
Also jammin, you didn't address my point in the quote box above. I've made it big this time so you can't miss it. Please address it.
Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 18 2012,15:25) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 18 2012,20:22) Well, that is news. I had not realized that Mike was a Jehovah's Witness! 
Fhow do you know
?
Pieear,I never said that I did know.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 19 2012,01:40) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 17 2012,19:59) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 18 2012,08:18) jammin, Many mss have “only begotten son” in 1:18, and many others have “only begotten god”. It's hard to tell which one John really wrote, but he definitely called Jesus a god in 1:1, right? So I have no problem with Jesus being a god, just as I have no problem with Satan being “the god of this age”. The word in Biblical times only meant “mighty one”, and was used of Jehovah, Jesus, Satan, angels, and even human beings.
And Jesus most definitely is a “mighty one”, right?
But here's the thing: If we accept “only begotten god” in 1:18, what then? Do you suppose that God Almighty was begotten by anyone at any time? Of course not. So if the Most High God was never begotten, what does it mean that Jesus is the “only BEGOTTEN god”?
If God's nature is “unbegotten”, and Jesus' nature is “begotten”, then you have a problem trying to get us to believe they are somehow “equal”, and even more of a problem trying to convince us that they are the same exact being.
your NWT says a god in john 1.1
but the greek text says was God. not a god boy.study greek
The following information is from the 25 TRINITARIAN scholars of NETNotes:John 1:1c
Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb.jammin, as limjunis has aptly pointed out, it seems your math skills are a little lacking, so let's take this slow.
Can you read in the above information that there are THREE different possible translations of John 1:1c? Here they are:
1. THE God
2. a god
3. god with a qualitative nuanceThis is not someone's opinion, jammin. These are the simple FACTS of the matter when translating the Greek of John 1:1c into English.
Before I move on, it would be nice to see you, Kerwin, Frank, and Ed ACKNOWLEDGE that these are simply FACTS of translation, and no bias has been added up to this point.
If any of you guys think these are NOT the simple FACTS of the matter, then simply refute the information made by these 25 scholars.
IF YOU DO NOT REFUTE THE INFO, THEN I WILL ASSUME IT IS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT REFUTE IT, AND THAT YOU ACCEPT IT AS THE FACTS OF THE MATTER.
Also jammin, you didn't address my point in the quote box above. I've made it big this time so you can't miss it. Please address it.
Mike,None of the information that you have submitted has not the least bit of bearing on Yahshua as pre-existing with his and our Father Yahweh in the beginning, since the word translated as 'god' does not always give reference to an actual being, person or mighty one, but can also simply refer to power, strength or might. Father Yahweh's word can most certainly be said to have the quality of power (authority), strength or might and can also be said to be with Him and coming from Him. Father Yahweh is the source of all power (authority), strength and might. Father Yahweh is the ONE and ONLY Mighty One.
ELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneDid Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 18 2012,20:21) Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 18 2012,20:09) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 17 2012,20:13) i accept monogenes huios. i do not have a problem with that boy.
but i think you have a problem boy
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 1:1818 θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος
the greek also says monogenes theos.
God the only sonstudy hard boy LOL
Jammin,John 1:18 is speaking of the Christ Spirit that dwells in the human Jesus; and not the human Jesus.
It is the Christ Spirit that makes the human Jesus the Son of God.
Christ became flesh. he was given a name jesus.
Jammin,It is my understanding you believe the soul of the person Christ with the nature God took on human flesh and so became a human being.
The actural words of Scripture are the Word was made flesh.
John 1:18 states:
John 1:18
King James Version (KJV)18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Elsewhere it is written:
1 Corinthians 2:11
King James Version (KJV)
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.Clearly the one spoken of in John 1:18 is the same one spoken of in 1 Corinthians 2:11 as only one has seen God and that is his Spirit; which I called the Christ Spirit. Jesus, the human, inherited the Christ Spirit; and so became the human to whom and by whom he revealed his deep things.
1 Corinthians 2:10
King James Version (KJV)10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 19 2012,08:09) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 19 2012,01:40) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 17 2012,19:59) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 18 2012,08:18) jammin, Many mss have “only begotten son” in 1:18, and many others have “only begotten god”. It's hard to tell which one John really wrote, but he definitely called Jesus a god in 1:1, right? So I have no problem with Jesus being a god, just as I have no problem with Satan being “the god of this age”. The word in Biblical times only meant “mighty one”, and was used of Jehovah, Jesus, Satan, angels, and even human beings.
And Jesus most definitely is a “mighty one”, right?
But here's the thing: If we accept “only begotten god” in 1:18, what then? Do you suppose that God Almighty was begotten by anyone at any time? Of course not. So if the Most High God was never begotten, what does it mean that Jesus is the “only BEGOTTEN god”?
If God's nature is “unbegotten”, and Jesus' nature is “begotten”, then you have a problem trying to get us to believe they are somehow “equal”, and even more of a problem trying to convince us that they are the same exact being.
your NWT says a god in john 1.1
but the greek text says was God. not a god boy.study greek
The following information is from the 25 TRINITARIAN scholars of NETNotes:John 1:1c
Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb.jammin, as limjunis has aptly pointed out, it seems your math skills are a little lacking, so let's take this slow.
Can you read in the above information that there are THREE different possible translations of John 1:1c? Here they are:
1. THE God
2. a god
3. god with a qualitative nuanceThis is not someone's opinion, jammin. These are the simple FACTS of the matter when translating the Greek of John 1:1c into English.
Before I move on, it would be nice to see you, Kerwin, Frank, and Ed ACKNOWLEDGE that these are simply FACTS of translation, and no bias has been added up to this point.
If any of you guys think these are NOT the simple FACTS of the matter, then simply refute the information made by these 25 scholars.
IF YOU DO NOT REFUTE THE INFO, THEN I WILL ASSUME IT IS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT REFUTE IT, AND THAT YOU ACCEPT IT AS THE FACTS OF THE MATTER.
Also jammin, you didn't address my point in the quote box above. I've made it big this time so you can't miss it. Please address it.
Mike,None of the information that you have submitted has not the least bit of bearing on Yahshua as pre-existing with his and our Father Yahweh in the beginning, since the word translated as 'god' does not always give reference to an actual being, person or mighty one, but can also simply refer to power, strength or might. Father Yahweh's word can most certainly be said to have the quality of power (authority), strength or might and can also be said to be with Him and coming from Him. Father Yahweh is the source of all power (authority), strength and might. Father Yahweh is the ONE and ONLY Mighty One.
ELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneDid Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
“Since the word “theos” in the phrase “the Word was God [theos]” is not preceded by the article “ho” (the God), as are the other two uses of theos in verses 1 and 2, it can be understood as an adjective rather than a noun; “the word was mighty”. Theos is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word “elohim” which can mean “mighty” as in Gen 30:8 and 1 Sam 14:15.”
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”
SOURCEQuote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 18 2012,15:09) ……..the word translated as 'god' does not always give reference to an actual being, person or mighty one, but can also simply refer to power, strength or might.
So then you agree that the word “theos” in 1:1c does NOT refer to the person of God mentioned in 1:1b as “THE theos”?Good for you, Frank.
Now you only need to know that the word in 1:1c was NOT written in the adjectival form, meaning it can NOT be saying something such as “and the Word was mighty”. (For “mighty” is an adjective.)
So it seems we are back to the THREE possibilities I've quoted from the NETNotes scholars.
Are you honest enough to acknowledge those THREE possibilities, Frank?
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 18 2012,15:50) Clearly the one spoken of in John 1:18 is the same one spoken of in 1 Corinthians 2:11………..
So when Moses made God known to the Israelites in the wilderness, he was also “the Spirit of God”?I don't think it's as “clear” as you claim, Kerwin. Don't forget that Jesus explained God to us, AND THEN sent “another helper”, the Spirit of God, to continue to explain God to us.
If the OTHER helper is the Spirit of God, then the first one (Jesus) could not also be the Spirit of God.
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 18 2012,17:19) “Since the word “theos” in the phrase “the Word was God [theos]” is not preceded by the article “ho” (the God), as are the other two uses of theos in verses 1 and 2, it can be understood as an adjective rather than a noun; “the word was mighty”. Theos is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word “elohim” which can mean “mighty” as in Gen 30:8 and 1 Sam 14:15.”
Gen 30:8 and 1 Sam 14:15 are written in HEBREW, not Greek, Frank. Nor is “mighty” the proper translation in those two verses.Can you show a GREEK instance of “theos”, where it is is written in NOUN form but rendered as an ADJECTIVE?
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,01:26) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 18 2012,16:47) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 18 2012,00:59) limjunus, i did not say TWO truly God. two persons but one in nature, nature God.
GOd is nature. God is form.
according to phil 2.6 paul said that.do you have TWO form or nature? LOL
you are sick boy LOLbtw,
it is non sense to talk to you bec you have no common sense boy LOL
you are using NLT to prove Christ is not GOd but that version says he is God LOLstudy hard boy
Jammin,You did not said “two truly God”?
You have said you have only one truly God, the Father.
You have said also that the Son is truly God.
How can count it, One?
Where is in the Bible that the One and only true God has two person but one in nature?
I am pretty sure, you will not answer, because it is your practice not to answer.
you and your father…how many???
of course you are 2 in numbers but you have ONE nature, and that is your human nature.
do you agree???btw
you are still not answering my question boy
do you have two form or nature? yes or no?
Jammin do not know what he is trying to talk about?Are we talking the nature of God or the nature of man?
If you are talking the nature of God,..define the nature of God?
What is your understanding with this words: “ONLY ONE TRUE GOD” and WHO IS HE?
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,01:26) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 18 2012,16:47) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 18 2012,00:59) limjunus, i did not say TWO truly God. two persons but one in nature, nature God.
GOd is nature. God is form.
according to phil 2.6 paul said that.do you have TWO form or nature? LOL
you are sick boy LOLbtw,
it is non sense to talk to you bec you have no common sense boy LOL
you are using NLT to prove Christ is not GOd but that version says he is God LOLstudy hard boy
Jammin,You did not said “two truly God”?
You have said you have only one truly God, the Father.
You have said also that the Son is truly God.
How can count it, One?
Where is in the Bible that the One and only true God has two person but one in nature?
I am pretty sure, you will not answer, because it is your practice not to answer.
you and your father…how many???
of course you are 2 in numbers but you have ONE nature, and that is your human nature.
do you agree???btw
you are still not answering my question boy
do you have two form or nature? yes or no?
Jammin said:you and your father…how many???
of course you are 2 in numbers but you have ONE nature, and that is your human nature.
do you agree???Jammin is mixing the nature of God and the nature of human. He try to avoid comparing it completely to cover his lie.
God nature= two numbers Father and the son.
Now, which one is the One and only true God nature, the Father or the son?
As what Jesus Christ said: ” …that they may know “you”[Father] the only true God.
In human nature= Father and son. Which is not true human nature, the Father or the Son?
Jammin, possible answer: Both of them is true human nature.
Now, you are contradicting your own doctrine by admitting that you are saying two truly God.
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,01:24) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 18 2012,16:47) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 18 2012,00:59) limjunus, i did not say TWO truly God. two persons but one in nature, nature God.
GOd is nature. God is form.
according to phil 2.6 paul said that.do you have TWO form or nature? LOL
you are sick boy LOLbtw,
it is non sense to talk to you bec you have no common sense boy LOL
you are using NLT to prove Christ is not GOd but that version says he is God LOLstudy hard boy
Jammin,You did not said “two truly God”?
You have said you have only one truly God, the Father.
You have said also that the Son is truly God.
How can count it, One?
Where is in the Bible that the One and only true God has two person but one in nature?
I am pretty sure, you will not answer, because it is your practice not to answer.
the bible said that Christ and the father have the same nature and that is their nature God.
btw
you did not answer my question boydo you have TWO form or nature??? yes or no?
Jammin,The Bible did not said that Jesus Christ and His Father are in One nature God. The Bible said that there is only one true God, the Father alone.
Just to ride-on with your own reasoning about the human nature.
You are a human and of course your father is also a human. the question is, which is not true human nature, you or your father?
As what you had explain, human nature is only one, if your father is the one and only human nature, meaning you are not in human nature. are you a ghost Jammin?
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,01:24) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 18 2012,16:47) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 18 2012,00:59) limjunus, i did not say TWO truly God. two persons but one in nature, nature God.
GOd is nature. God is form.
according to phil 2.6 paul said that.do you have TWO form or nature? LOL
you are sick boy LOLbtw,
it is non sense to talk to you bec you have no common sense boy LOL
you are using NLT to prove Christ is not GOd but that version says he is God LOLstudy hard boy
Jammin,You did not said “two truly God”?
You have said you have only one truly God, the Father.
You have said also that the Son is truly God.
How can count it, One?
Where is in the Bible that the One and only true God has two person but one in nature?
I am pretty sure, you will not answer, because it is your practice not to answer.
the bible said that Christ and the father have the same nature and that is their nature God.
btw
you did not answer my question boydo you have TWO form or nature??? yes or no?
ust to ride-on with your own reasoning about the human nature.You are a human and of course your father is also a human. the question is, which is not true human nature, you or your father?
As what you had explain, human nature is only one, if your father is the one and only human nature, meaning you are not in human nature. are you a ghost Jammin?
How many human nature you and your father Jammin? One or two?
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,01:30) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 18 2012,17:26) jammin,Aug. wrote:[quote=limjunus,Aug. 17 2012,21:21]
jammin,Aug. wrote:mike,
John 1:18 Common English Bible (CEB)
18 No one has ever seen God.
God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made God known.“God, the only Son,” means the only Son of God, who is at the Father's side, has made God known.
Jammin, do not do any alteration of the Bible passages. Better make your own Bible “kiddie boy”.
you are the one who altered the scripture boy.
i think you do not know how to read LOLlet me post again the CEB
John 1:18Common English Bible (CEB)
18 No one has ever seen God.
God the only Son,
who is at the Father’s side,
has made God known.there is no comma after the word God boy> LOL
make your own bible
Jammin believe that Jesus Christ is not the only begotten Son of God,….. but instead he is now tightly holding the CEB version. “God the only son”Who is now the begotten Son of Jesus Christ, if he is not the begotten Son?
Jammin, go and find another version of the Bible that could make your doctrines more worse than before. The truth of Jammin with contradicting versions. he he he Hello kiddie boy”!
limjunus,
the bible said God the only son. the bible said begotten God.
the bible said only begotten son of God.
i have no problem with that boy bec the bible said that.but you have a problem boy. LOL
why??? bec you do not accept the whole truth of the bible.
LOLpaul said that God is nature (phil2.6)
btw,you are still not answering my question.
do you have TWO form or nature? yes or no?Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 19 2012,15:09) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,01:30) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 18 2012,17:26) jammin,Aug. wrote:[quote=limjunus,Aug. 17 2012,21:21]
jammin,Aug. wrote:mike,
John 1:18 Common English Bible (CEB)
18 No one has ever seen God.
God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made God known.“God, the only Son,” means the only Son of God, who is at the Father's side, has made God known.
Jammin, do not do any alteration of the Bible passages. Better make your own Bible “kiddie boy”.
you are the one who altered the scripture boy.
i think you do not know how to read LOLlet me post again the CEB
John 1:18Common English Bible (CEB)
18 No one has ever seen God.
God the only Son,
who is at the Father’s side,
has made God known.there is no comma after the word God boy> LOL
make your own bible
Jammin believe that Jesus Christ is not the only begotten Son of God,….. but instead he is now tightly holding the CEB version. “God the only son”Who is now the begotten Son of Jesus Christ, if he is not the begotten Son?
Jammin, go and find another version of the Bible that could make your doctrines more worse than before. The truth of Jammin with contradicting versions. he he he Hello kiddie boy”!
now you are caught in the act boy LOLit is very clear that you put a comma after the word God in john 1.18
LOLmake your own bible.
LOL
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 19 2012,08:50) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 18 2012,20:21) Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 18 2012,20:09) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 17 2012,20:13) i accept monogenes huios. i do not have a problem with that boy.
but i think you have a problem boy
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 1:1818 θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος
the greek also says monogenes theos.
God the only sonstudy hard boy LOL
Jammin,John 1:18 is speaking of the Christ Spirit that dwells in the human Jesus; and not the human Jesus.
It is the Christ Spirit that makes the human Jesus the Son of God.
Christ became flesh. he was given a name jesus.
Jammin,It is my understanding you believe the soul of the person Christ with the nature God took on human flesh and so became a human being.
The actural words of Scripture are the Word was made flesh.
John 1:18 states:
John 1:18
King James Version (KJV)18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Elsewhere it is written:
1 Corinthians 2:11
King James Version (KJV)
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.Clearly the one spoken of in John 1:18 is the same one spoken of in 1 Corinthians 2:11 as only one has seen God and that is his Spirit; which I called the Christ Spirit. Jesus, the human, inherited the Christ Spirit; and so became the human to whom and by whom he revealed his deep things.
1 Corinthians 2:10
King James Version (KJV)10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
the Word in john 1.1 is a title of Christ. it is his name kerwin.rev 19.13
Revelation 19:13New International Version (NIV)
13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.
John 1:1
Contemporary English Version (CEV)
The Word of Life1 In the beginning was the one
who is called the Word.
The Word was with God
and was truly God.read well your bible.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 19 2012,01:40) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 17 2012,19:59) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 18 2012,08:18) jammin, Many mss have “only begotten son” in 1:18, and many others have “only begotten god”. It's hard to tell which one John really wrote, but he definitely called Jesus a god in 1:1, right? So I have no problem with Jesus being a god, just as I have no problem with Satan being “the god of this age”. The word in Biblical times only meant “mighty one”, and was used of Jehovah, Jesus, Satan, angels, and even human beings.
And Jesus most definitely is a “mighty one”, right?
But here's the thing: If we accept “only begotten god” in 1:18, what then? Do you suppose that God Almighty was begotten by anyone at any time? Of course not. So if the Most High God was never begotten, what does it mean that Jesus is the “only BEGOTTEN god”?
If God's nature is “unbegotten”, and Jesus' nature is “begotten”, then you have a problem trying to get us to believe they are somehow “equal”, and even more of a problem trying to convince us that they are the same exact being.
your NWT says a god in john 1.1
but the greek text says was God. not a god boy.study greek
The following information is from the 25 TRINITARIAN scholars of NETNotes:John 1:1c
Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb.jammin, as limjunis has aptly pointed out, it seems your math skills are a little lacking, so let's take this slow.
Can you read in the above information that there are THREE different possible translations of John 1:1c? Here they are:
1. THE God
2. a god
3. god with a qualitative nuanceThis is not someone's opinion, jammin. These are the simple FACTS of the matter when translating the Greek of John 1:1c into English.
Before I move on, it would be nice to see you, Kerwin, Frank, and Ed ACKNOWLEDGE that these are simply FACTS of translation, and no bias has been added up to this point.
If any of you guys think these are NOT the simple FACTS of the matter, then simply refute the information made by these 25 scholars.
IF YOU DO NOT REFUTE THE INFO, THEN I WILL ASSUME IT IS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT REFUTE IT, AND THAT YOU ACCEPT IT AS THE FACTS OF THE MATTER.
Also jammin, you didn't address my point in the quote box above. I've made it big this time so you can't miss it. Please address it.
i think you do not know the meaning of begotten in john1.18it means unique one
John 1:18John 1:18
New Living Translation (NLT)
18 No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God, is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.
mike, do you have any formal studies in greek?
i suggest you study greek mike.
most greek scholars agree that the john 1.1 should be translated was God and not a god.
only your NWT wants a god and not was God to support their illusion LOLQuote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,17:51) limjunus, 1. the bible said God the only son.
2. the bible said begotten God.
3. the bible said only begotten son of God.
4. paul said that God is nature (phil2.6)
1. No, the Greek text never says that.2. SOME Greek mss say “only begotten god” in John 1:18 – others say “only begotten son”.
3. YES.
4. That is not even close to what Paul said in Phil 2:6.
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 19 2012,18:11) most greek scholars agree that the john 1.1 should be translated was God and not a god.
Yes jammin. And MOST scholars are Trinitarians who want desperately for Jesus to actually BE the very God he is the Son of – in spite of how nonsensical that concept is.My question was simple, jammin. Do you acknowledge that there are THREE grammatical ways to translate John 1:1c?
(Once you acknowledge what is known to be a FACT, then we can discuss which of those three makes the most sense.)
Also, you STILL haven't addressed my points that I made big in the quote box. Why not?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
