JOHN 1:1 who is the WORD?

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,04:31)

Quote (limjunus @ Oct. 09 2012,22:12)

Mike, believe that there are many gods and among so many gods, there is only true God. Jehovah, is the only true God to be worship alone …

…. and Jesus Christ, even though he is a god, he should not be worship together with so called gods in this world.

Frank Believe that there is only one true God, the Father of Jesus Christ and his apostles/disciples and the other so called gods and lords are not true gods but instead representing the gods of the world.

The confusing factors is, the word “gods”, meant to Mike, “that we should recognize that there are existing called gods, even though there are not true God.

So the problem between Mike and Frank is,

a.) Mike: recognize that the so called gods are existing gods and should not be taken not true gods.

b.) Frank: the so called gods should not be recognize as the only true God, instead shall be known the gods as false god.

Correct me if I am wrong with my comprehension?

You have summed it up correctly, as far as I can tell, limjunis. As usual, you are very perceptive.

Now, just consider the two final conclusions you came to:

a.) Mike: recognize that the so called gods are existing gods and should not be taken [as] not true gods.

b.) Frank: the so called gods should not be recognize as the only true God, instead shall be known the gods as false god.

Which one of those conclusions allows for Jesus to be called god in scripture (which he is), but DOESN'T allow for Jesus to be a “false god” (which he is not)?

Scripturally speaking, my understanding is the only one that fits the scriptures, yet doesn't have Jesus being a “false god”.

No, limjunis has not summed it up correctly, since I have never said such foolishness as “the so called gods should not be recognize as the only true God, instead shall be known the gods as false god.”

I also do not believe “that there is only one true God, the Father of Jesus Christ and his apostles/disciples and the other so called gods and lords are not true gods but instead representing the gods of the world.

WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter One

ELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98

The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92

…

October 11, 2012 at 8:29 pm#315812

mikeboll64

Blocked

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,12:41)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,12:29)

Why? It is because the translators know what we all seem to know………………. the word “worship”, as we generally understand it, concerns the obeisance given ONLY to God Almighty, and to no one else.

Mike

Kerwin and frank know that this is why they have deceit in them
The truth in them as told them so but because my English andicapt they play the devil game

I also believe they know full well what you were saying, Pierre. Sometimes people are purposely difficult when they're trying to make their own point without acknowledging the other person's point.

October 11, 2012 at 9:18 pm#315814

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,04:57)

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Oct. 10 2012,12:14)

You fail to realize that my disagreement with you is that you believe that IDOLS/GODS have power when in fact Scripture clearly teaches that they do not.

Scripture actually teaches the opposite of what you teach, Frank. Many of the gods mentioned in scripture displayed their power.

Consider this scripture:
Acts 16 New International Version 1984
16 Once when we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit by which she predicted the future. She earned a great deal of money for her owners by fortune-telling.

17 This girl followed Paul and the rest of us, shouting, “These men are servants of the Most High God, who are telling you the way to be saved.”

18 She kept this up for many days. Finally Paul became so troubled that he turned around and said to the spirit, “In the name of Jesus Christ I command you to come out of her!” At that moment the spirit left her.

Who was this “spirit”, Frank? And by what POWER did this spirit enable this girl to foretell the future accurately?

You need to take off you blinders, and BELIEVE what you are taught in the scriptures, Frank. Satan is called “the god of this age” in scripture, yet you would have us believing that Satan has no power whatsoever. Yet, that which you preach goes against the rest of the scriptures.

Where in any of these verses and passages of this translation that you have presented does it ever say that these spirits are IDOLS/GODS?

No, this transaltion does not say “this spirit enable[d] this girl to foretell the future ACCURATELY!

Who was this spirit? It actually does not identify who this spirit was in this translation, now does it?

How convenient of you to present to me a translation worded in such a manner! :laugh:

You might want to check out a number of other translations of these verses and passages from the following link before you again attempt to deceive one who is much wiser than you! :laugh:
http://bible.cc

WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter One

ELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98

The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92

…

October 11, 2012 at 9:22 pm#315816

terraricca

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,14:29)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,12:41)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,12:29)

Mike

Kerwin and frank know that this is why they have deceit in them
The truth in them as told them so but because my English andicapt they play the devil game

I also believe they know full well what you were saying, Pierre. Sometimes people are purposely difficult when they're trying to make their own point without acknowledging the other person's point.

October 11, 2012 at 10:13 pm#315817

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,07:29)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,12:41)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,12:29)

Mike

Kerwin and frank know that this is why they have deceit in them
The truth in them as told them so but because my English andicapt they play the devil game

I also believe they know full well what you were saying, Pierre. Sometimes people are purposely difficult when they're trying to make their own point without acknowledging the other person's point.

:laugh: Now that is a laugh! Really? We know full well what he is saying when he can't even communicate properly in English and is not aware that words have diverse definitions? Communicating with you, Pie and t is like communicating with a box of rocks! :laugh:

WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter One

ELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98

The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92

…

October 11, 2012 at 11:49 pm#315818

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,00:41)

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 10 2012,03:34)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 09 2012,22:40)

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 07 2012,15:55)

Hi Charles,
I asked Mike how many 'theos' are to be known, believed in, served, honored, and praised in order to have eternal salvation.

I'd be interested to hear Charles' and jammin's answer to that question.

Well guys? What's the NUMERICAL answer to Kathi's question?

Mike,

There are many gods whether in heaven or on earth; but to us there is but one God; Jehovah, the Lord of Multitudes, the Source of all good things.

Kerwin,

I agree with what you've posted, because it is scriptural. But knowing that Jesus is called a god in scripture, what is your NUMERICAL answer to Kathi's question?

Mike,

Her question was not specific enough and therefore left too much open to interpretation. I answered like I did in order to be more specific.

If she meant to ask “how many “theos” there are that are worthy to be worshiped”, then the answer is one.

If she meant to ask “how many “theos” there are that cannot be tempted by evil”, then the answer is also one.

October 11, 2012 at 11:58 pm#315819

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,00:41)

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 10 2012,03:25)

Mike,

[Godhead] is an accurate translation at the time the KJV was written…………

Please show your expert support that agrees “Godhead” is an accurate translation of these Greek words.

Mike,

Here is one of the two definitions Merriam-Websters give

Definition of GODHEAD

1: divine nature or essence

This is the second definition and it is clearly not the one Scripture means and probably did not exist until after certain sects sought to support their teaching by giving it a new definition.

b : the nature of God especially as existing in three persons —used with the

October 12, 2012 at 12:09 am#315822

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,17:21)

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 11 2012,22:28)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,09:31)

So your debate is deceitful ,just as the words you using are ambiguous ,right

Is speaking English deceitful because words are ambiguous?

I would use fluid as the meaning changes with context just as both Greek and Hebrew words do. Some contexts do create a certain amount of ambitiousness that can lead to miscommunications.

Kerwin

nice try but you mist the point ,i was not talking about the language but about the use of ambiguous words in that language ,and his knowingly used to make others fall in a trap.you are very good at it ,

I DO NOT RECALL GOD USING SUCH A VOCABULARY AND INTENTION,

it becomes obvious that the ones using those means are not true in their hearts ,and so do not have truth in mind when speaking.THIS IS NOT THE WAY OF CHRIST ,NOR OF HIS TRUE FOLLOWERS

God uses ambiguous words for the same reason Jesus speaks in parables.

Those who seek his righteousness and kingdom will come to understand them.

I doubt that either you or Frank do not understand that when Scripture speaks of the people worshiping their it does not mean the same as them worshiping Jehovah.

October 12, 2012 at 4:12 am#315837

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 12 2012,04:21)

Quote (jammin @ Oct. 09 2012,21:36)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 10 2012,03:37)

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 07 2012,15:51)

God here in Phil 2:6 seems to be a particular type of form and not a particular person.

Quote (jammin @ Oct. 07 2012,19:06)

paul is talking about nature in phil 2.6 and not a particular person

You mean like this?

6 Who, existing with the nature of the species known as “God”,
did not consider equality with the species known as “God” something to be grasped……..

i did not say species mike.

i said NATURE!

But look at your words in the quote box above, jammin:

paul is talking about nature in phil 2.6 and not a particular person

If you are NOT talking about the nature of a PARTICULAR PERSON, then you have no choice but to be talking about the nature of a SPECIES of being.

There are no other choices, jammin. So you can deny “species” if you want, because you realize how ludicrous it sounds when said out loud, but “species” IS what you are talking about – whether or not you bring yourself to say the word.

the word species is not written in the bible.

therefore, your argument is non sense.

btw
do you have now any version that says FORM OF HIS GOD in phil 2.6

you are just saying that the WORD NATURE is flawed version bec it does not support your doctrine.
i accept the versions saying FORM but there are also versions that say NATURE in phil 2.6
and greek scholars agreed that morphe can mean NATURE.

do not fool people mike. commentaries are also accepting that view.
the bible says it and you cant ignore that TRUTH.

your words FORM OF HIS GOD is truly a false doctrine.
NO VERSIONS SAY THAT! IT IS JUST ONLY YOU BOY! LOL

October 12, 2012 at 4:16 am#315838

Participant

Quote (limjunus @ Oct. 11 2012,22:55)

Quote (jammin @ Oct. 10 2012,18:09)

limjunus,

cant you read gal 4.4??/ LOL

the father sent his son!
the son did not send himself but the father. your question is non sense LOL

Jammin,

Before you talk and not too much, answer my pending questions on you. Remember, you owe me a lot of answers.

You have post before that you believe that the true God, the Father of Jesus is only one.

Now, you are admitting without shame that the Father sent the son (Jesus Christ). and using the verse Gal. 4:4. and you believing that the son (Jesus Christ) is truly God, by basing the Philippians 2:6.

See your enumeration:

Father – only true God.
Son – Truly God

So therefore, you are not believing that the true God, is not only one, but two truly Gods.

Here is again your another theory:

Jesus Christ did not died because he is truly God, inside the flesh, only the body died.

The very important question is, “If Jesus Christ did not died because he is truly God,inside the flesh but instead only his body died.”

Who is the body raised from the dead by God, and ascended to heaven and sit-down in the right hand of the only true God?

Now, you owe me a lots of answers.

It's time not to talk too much, It's the time to answers “kiddie boy”

LOL

i already answered your questions many many times! LOL

there is ONE TRULY GOD the FATHER! john 17.3
there is ONE GOD THE ONLY SON! john 1.18
the bible said that.

GOD is their nature. they both have the same nature. phil 2.6
john 1.1

are you blind boy? READ john 1.1 and phil 2.6 over and over again.

the body of Christ DIED.
and that BODY WAS RAISED from the dead.

October 12, 2012 at 4:17 am#315839

Participant

mike,

dont forget you homework.

give a version that says FORM OF HIS GOD in phil 2.6

ill wait boy

October 12, 2012 at 5:26 am#315845

Participant

Quote (jammin @ Oct. 12 2012,10:17)

mike,

dont forget you homework.

give a version that says FORM OF HIS GOD in phil 2.6

ill wait boy

Jammin,

You choose to put much faith in translators. Why?

October 12, 2012 at 5:27 am#315846

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 11 2012,12:37)

Hi Mike,

You notice how he refused to say “No” when I asked him the question of species.
He knows that it doesn't sound right and he rejects the very wording he is describing.

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 09 2012,16:22)

Quote (jammin @ Oct. 09 2012,13:33)

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 09 2012,02:41)

Hi Jammin,

Rather than God being an individual, are you suggesting
that “God” is (according to you) a species instead? <– please answer

species: A group subordinate to a genus and containing individuals
agreeing in some common attributes and called by a common name.

God bless
Ed J

i cant read species in the bible.

that is just an opinion from men

i can read nature..Christ's nature is God. phil 2.6

Hi Jammin, is your answer “No” then?

Nature: The inherent character or basic constitution of a person or thing
Attributes: A quality or feature regarded as a characteristic or inherent part of someone or something.

God bless
Ed J

Jammin,

So, is your answer “No” then?

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

jammin,
I like how you stick to the words of the Bible. People try to put words in your mouth. I have noticed that you said the Bible is silent on thus and so and so will you be. Silence does not mean yes or no.

As far as Jesus sharing the nature of God, you are correct and the Bible tells us more than once and every time that Jesus is said to be the Son of God, that is what is meant. He is the same nature as God the Father.

Heb 1:3 3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature,…

Phil 2:6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,…

Keep it up jammin

October 12, 2012 at 5:33 am#315847

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 12 2012,00:26)

Quote (jammin @ Oct. 12 2012,10:17)

mike,

dont forget you homework.

give a version that says FORM OF HIS GOD in phil 2.6

ill wait boy

Jammin,

You choose to put much faith in translators. Why?

jammin knows that the word 'his' is not in the text, Kerwin, so why are you getting on his case? Shouldn't you be getting on the person's case that is adding words to the text.

Don't you think that the manuscripts should be translated accurately? When they are, we can put our faith in what they say. When they are not translated correctly, we can not put our faith in what they say because they would not be the inspired word of God.

October 12, 2012 at 6:40 am#315853

carmel

Participant

mikeboll64,Oct. wrote:

[/quote]

Quote

There are many things wrong with your post. For
one, Peter, John, Paul, Thomas, and the others WERE Israelites who DID understand the notion of sacrificing a LAMB to atone for the sins of humans.

Mike,

WRONG AGAIN,

First of all you are talking nearly two thousand years from Abraham( purposely sent by God to be selected as the first father)

What happened to all those Israelites which opposed God, after He freed them from the Jews???

Why God himself wanted to destroy them all and start all over again through Moses only months from freedom???

Now to your vain argument regarding the apostles:

Although they were Israelites, they were PURPOSELY SENT BY GOD AND SELECTED BY JESUS to be HIS disciples, to introduce and establish the church.

Are you so BLIND to believe that in a world of demons in FLESH, and Satan himself was the god of the world, his kingdom on earth,

IT WAS POSSIBLE TO FIND PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IN THE TRUTH, EXCEPT ONLY THOSE PEOPLE WHO WERE BORN OF GOD,BY THE INTERVENTION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT???

Luke 11: And if Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because you say, that through Beelzebub I cast out devils.

ONLY GOD IN JESUS HAD THE POWER TO REMOVE DEVILS FROM HUMAN BEINGS’SOULS!!!

I REAPEAT ORDINARY HUMANS,NO MATTER WHAT COULD NEVER BE BORN WITHOUT BEING CONTAMINATED AND DEAD IN THE SPIRIT OF SATAN!!!

THEREFORE THEY COULD NEVER ACCEPT THE TRUE GOD AS AN INVISIBLE,AMD A MYSTERIOUS ENTITY, NO MATTER HOW MANY MIRACLES HE DOES FOR THEM!!!

ONLY THOSE WHO WERE BORN OF GOD THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Read:

John 1:12But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name. 13 Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Now read and reflect regarding the appostles!!!

John 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which

thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

Clear enough NO ??

THEY WERE GIVEN BY THE FATHER OUT OF THE WORLD.

THEY WERE THE FATHER'S AND WERE GIVEN TO JESUS !!
ARE YOU IN PITCH DARK???

17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

JESUS GAVE EMPHASIS, THAT THE FATHER GAVE HIM HIS APPOSTLES, AND STRESSED THAT THEY WERE THE FATHER'S

ARE YOU IN PITCH DARK???

17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

AGAIN STRESSING TO MAKE US AWARE OF WHAT HE MEANT.

HE COMPARE THEM TO HIMSELF BY SAYING:

THEY ARE NOT OF THE WORLD,

SO THEY ARE NOT ORDINARY ISRAELITES,

EVEN AS I AM NOT OF THE WORLD.

SO THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THE APPOSTLES WERE OF HEAVEN LIKE JESUS WAS OF HEAVEN!!

OBVIOUS, HEAVEN IS NOT IN ONE REALM.

JESUS WAS THE SPIRIT FROM THE FATHER.

THE APPOSTLES WERE ANGELS'SPIRIT SENT BY THE FATHER WITHIN HUMANS .

THIS IS DEMONSTRATED IN JACOB'S LADDER.

REFER TO IT AND REFLECT.

IF YOU KNOW HOW??????????

Peace and love in Jesus

Charles

October 12, 2012 at 7:20 am#315855

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 12 2012,11:33)

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 12 2012,00:26)

Quote (jammin @ Oct. 12 2012,10:17)

mike,

dont forget you homework.

give a version that says FORM OF HIS GOD in phil 2.6

ill wait boy

Jammin,

You choose to put much faith in translators. Why?

jammin knows that the word 'his' is not in the text, Kerwin, so why are you getting on his case? Shouldn't you be getting on the person's case that is adding words to the text.

Kathi,

I have yet to find any translations that reveal the translators were carried along by the Spirit. Jammin seems to look for those translations that are least trustworthy or which have comments by Trinitarians. I find such witnesses to be non-creditable. Even on the others I prefer to glean what I can from the underlying Ancient Greek and Hebrew languages in hopes understanding God's words. Even the Ancient Greek and Hebrew Scripture we have are probably not 100% reliable as the manuscripts differ on some points, but they are better than the English ones translated from them.

Jammin can find one or more of the better translations and then use resources to learn the meaning that are being translated.

The new man is not Jehovah but never the less exists in him that created him.

Colossians 3:10
King James Version (KJV)

10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

Adam was created in the image of God.

Genesis 1:27
King James Version (KJV)

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Do you see the word “his”?

October 12, 2012 at 11:15 am#315873

terraricca

Participant

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 12 2012,18:09)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,17:21)

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 11 2012,22:28)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,09:31)

So your debate is deceitful ,just as the words you using are ambiguous ,right

Is speaking English deceitful because words are ambiguous?

I would use fluid as the meaning changes with context just as both Greek and Hebrew words do. Some contexts do create a certain amount of ambitiousness that can lead to miscommunications.

Kerwin

I DO NOT RECALL GOD USING SUCH A VOCABULARY AND INTENTION,

it becomes obvious that the ones using those means are not true in their hearts ,and so do not have truth in mind when speaking.THIS IS NOT THE WAY OF CHRIST ,NOR OF HIS TRUE FOLLOWERS

God uses ambiguous words for the same reason Jesus speaks in parables.

Those who seek his righteousness and kingdom will come to understand them.

I doubt that either you or Frank do not understand that when Scripture speaks of the people worshiping their it does not mean the same as them worshiping Jehovah.

I do ,it is you that argues that it is the same

October 12, 2012 at 4:32 pm#315888

Participant

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 12 2012,11:09)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,17:21)

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 11 2012,22:28)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 11 2012,09:31)

So your debate is deceitful ,just as the words you using are ambiguous ,right

Is speaking English deceitful because words are ambiguous?

I would use fluid as the meaning changes with context just as both Greek and Hebrew words do. Some contexts do create a certain amount of ambitiousness that can lead to miscommunications.

Kerwin

I DO NOT RECALL GOD USING SUCH A VOCABULARY AND INTENTION,

it becomes obvious that the ones using those means are not true in their hearts ,and so do not have truth in mind when speaking.THIS IS NOT THE WAY OF CHRIST ,NOR OF HIS TRUE FOLLOWERS

God uses ambiguous words for the same reason Jesus speaks in parables.

Those who seek his righteousness and kingdom will come to understand them.

I doubt that either you or Frank do not understand that when Scripture speaks of the people worshiping their it does not mean the same as them worshiping Jehovah.

kerwin,

I may be misunderstanding you since you used too many negatives (doubt, not, not) in one sentence, but it seemed to me that you believe I do realize the difference between the “worship” of Yahweh and the “worship” of others. I do though. For example, I believe that Yahshua can be “worshiped, but not as his and our Father Yahweh. Yahshua is “worshiped as the anointed king and high priest. Do you agee with this and do you not agree with most of what I have made known on my web page concerning the words that are translated as “worship”?:
Word Studies On Worship
(shachah, latreuo, and proskuneo)

WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter One

ELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98

The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92

…

October 12, 2012 at 6:38 pm#315893