- This topic has 25,946 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 13 hours, 14 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
T
you posted a version that says Christ is God. have you forgotten that? hahaha
Kerwin,
i do not need to repeat myself. it is enough for me to show you a WORD FOR WORD TRANSLATION that the Word in john 1.1 is Christ and not what you think. you cant win a case without any supporting documents. you are a lawyer that should have no case hahaha
Quote (carmel @ May 29 2014,00:35) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 29 2014,11:19) What if I called Him “my God” four times? Would that also tell you that I am in the glory of the Father? Mike,
I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU ARE
BUT I DO KNOW WHO JESUS CHRIST IS!
I also know who Jesus Christ is. The “Christ” part tells us he is the anointed one OF God, and therefore NOT “God Himself”.Quote (carmel @ May 29 2014,00:55) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 28 2014,06:17) Hi,
Of course God was in Jesus reconciling the world to Himself[2cor 5.19]
But God was not in Himself
Nick,NEVERTHELESS
GOD WAS IN HIMSELF!
Do you even hear yourself, Charles? God was in Himself?
Quote (kerwin @ May 29 2014,11:19) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 29 2014,06:21) Quote (kerwin @ May 28 2014,10:54) Jammin, Some do believe it is a lower case gee while others a high case gee as a result of their bias.
And why don't YOU believe the Word is Jesus in that verse, Kerwin?Could that ALSO be because of “bias”?
Mike,…….my bias is that I believe that Jesus is a human being who served as an example and more for those that seek first his righteousness and his kingdom.
Okay……….As long as you are able to recognize your own bias, and not just that of the Trinitarians.
Quote (carmel @ May 29 2014,12:49) Mike, NOW SHOW ME YOUR WISDOM, AND EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE PROCLAMATIONS BY PAUL WHICH HE PRONOUNCED PURPOSELY:
ONE AFTER THE OTHER
IN ORDER TO REVEAL THE TRUTH ?
Ephissians 1: Grace be to you, and peace from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
DEFINITELY A CLEAR REFERENCE TO TWO SEPARATE PERSONS SEPARATED BY A COMMA, AND WITH THE IMPLICATION OF THE WORD “FROM”! TO THEIR RESPECTIVE TITLES
IN THIS CASE GOD ALMIGHTY, AND JESUS CHRIST!
Yep, you nailed it, Charles!Clear and undeniable proof that “Jesus Christ” is one, and “God Almighty” is another.
Quote (jammin @ May 29 2014,18:44) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 29 2014,11:00) Quote (jammin @ May 28 2014,06:49) those who have ENOUGH knowledge about greek will not translate john 1.1 as god but God.
Those who know Greek will tell you that both “THE god”, and “A god” are possible translations.The Greek language allows for either one in that verse.
So the fact that the Trinitarians OPT FOR the “God” translation has nothing to do with the Greek language, jammin. It has to do with bias and lack of understanding.
I mean really, how can our ONE God be WITH our ONE God? It's absolutely ludicrous.
But at any rate, don't ever say that the Greek language makes the decision for anyone. Because even the staunchest Trinitarian experts will tell you that “a god” is also a possible way to translate those Greek words.
those are not well knowledgeable about the greek language or they will tell you that that translation is not gramatically favoured.
I've never read that it is not “grammatically favoured”. I've read from Trinitarians that it would be a travesty to translate it that way, but that “a god” is indeed an equally possible translation of the Greek words in John 1:1.These two are Trinitarian scholars, jammin:
Murray J. Harris has written: “Accordingly, from the point of view of grammar alone, [QEOS HN hO LOGOS] could be rendered “the Word was a god,….” -Jesus As God, 1992, p. 60.
C. H. Dodd says: “If a translation were a matter of substituting words, a possible translation of [QEOS EN hO LOGOS]; would be, “The Word was a god”. As a word-for-word translation it cannot be faulted.“
And this one is from a noted professor of Greek Studies, who compared nine different English translations of the Bible side by side, and wrote a book about how each translation ranked. The book is called Truth in Translation.
Dr. Jason BeDuhn (of Northern Arizona University) in regard to the Kingdom Interlinear's appendix that gives the reason why the NWT favoured a translation of John 1:1 as saying the Word was not “God” but “a god” said:
“In fact the KIT [Appendix 2A, p.1139] explanation is perfectly correct according to the best scholarship done on this subject..”
Oh, and after all that study and comparison, he ranked the NWT as first place among the nine he compared. (And no, he is not a JW, and never has been a JW.)
Anyway, just remember that it is BIAS, and not Greek grammar rules, that keep the Trinitarians translating as “God” in John 1:1.
I have nothing more to say on the matter. I was just trying to keep you from sounding ignorant. There is no Greek grammar rule that favors “God” over “a god” in John 1:1.
Quote (jammin @ May 29 2014,18:56) of course you should not take it (God created all things)literally because God never created himself.
Then my point has been made.Quote (jammin @ May 29 2014,18:56) no commentaries and bible versions will agree to your fairy tale doctrine mike.
Agreed. No TRINITARIAN commentary will agree that Jesus was a creation of God.But the non-Trinitarian commentaries do.
Which would you rather believe? The commentary from the man who thinks the Son, Priest, Prophet, Lamb, Messiah, Word, and Servant OF God IS the very God he is all those things OF?
Or the man who knows that's about the most ridiculous thing he's ever heard?
I'll choose the second one, thanks. That second guy is telling it ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES, and not according to fantasy.
mike,
of course you have no common sense., hahahha
is that the way how your teachers teach their students?
why would anyone think God created himself by just reading the phrase God created all things?? hahaha
i can say i created my computer but it does not mean i created myself. you are not making any sense hahaha.
as i said, your reading comprehension is SO POOR AND I AM NOT expecting too much from you. i know you are having a hard time understanding and reading words so it is normal that you give non sense words. hahaha
Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 30 2014,12:23) Quote (jammin @ May 29 2014,18:44) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 29 2014,11:00) Quote (jammin @ May 28 2014,06:49) those who have ENOUGH knowledge about greek will not translate john 1.1 as god but God.
Those who know Greek will tell you that both “THE god”, and “A god” are possible translations.The Greek language allows for either one in that verse.
So the fact that the Trinitarians OPT FOR the “God” translation has nothing to do with the Greek language, jammin. It has to do with bias and lack of understanding.
I mean really, how can our ONE God be WITH our ONE God? It's absolutely ludicrous.
But at any rate, don't ever say that the Greek language makes the decision for anyone. Because even the staunchest Trinitarian experts will tell you that “a god” is also a possible way to translate those Greek words.
those are not well knowledgeable about the greek language or they will tell you that that translation is not gramatically favoured.
I've never read that it is not “grammatically favoured”. I've read from Trinitarians that it would be a travesty to translate it that way, but that “a god” is indeed an equally possible translation of the Greek words in John 1:1.These two are Trinitarian scholars, jammin:
Murray J. Harris has written: “Accordingly, from the point of view of grammar alone, [QEOS HN hO LOGOS] could be rendered “the Word was a god,….” -Jesus As God, 1992, p. 60.
C. H. Dodd says: “If a translation were a matter of substituting words, a possible translation of [QEOS EN hO LOGOS]; would be, “The Word was a god”. As a word-for-word translation it cannot be faulted.“
And this one is from a noted professor of Greek Studies, who compared nine different English translations of the Bible side by side, and wrote a book about how each translation ranked. The book is called Truth in Translation.
Dr. Jason BeDuhn (of Northern Arizona University) in regard to the Kingdom Interlinear's appendix that gives the reason why the NWT favoured a translation of John 1:1 as saying the Word was not “God” but “a god” said:
“In fact the KIT [Appendix 2A, p.1139] explanation is perfectly correct according to the best scholarship done on this subject..”
Oh, and after all that study and comparison, he ranked the NWT as first place among the nine he compared. (And no, he is not a JW, and never has been a JW.)
Anyway, just remember that it is BIAS, and not Greek grammar rules, that keep the Trinitarians translating as “God” in John 1:1.
I have nothing more to say on the matter. I was just trying to keep you from sounding ignorant. There is no Greek grammar rule that favors “God” over “a god” in John 1:1.
because you do not know anything about greek that is why. hahahayou just copied and pasted works from others but you know NOTHING hahahaha. you are a big clown! hahaha
rt H. Gundry of Westmont College, Ca, USA wrote us:
“As to the translation of John 1:1,”and the Word was a god” is grammatically possible but not grammatically favoured.”
what can you say about 2cor1.3 KAI THEOS? why did the NWT says the “God” and not “god”? if i will follow their poor knowledge of greek, the 2cor1.3 should be translated as god and not God. i know you have no idea what i am talking about because you DID NOT STUDY GREEK.
you must also know that DODD said it is not acceptable!
C.H.Dodd has also written
The reason why it is unacceptable is that it runs counter to the current of Johannine thought, and indeed of Christian thought as a whole.”-Technical Papers for The Bible Translator, Vol 28, No.1, January 1977.(italics ours)dont ever think that Dodd is accepting that version. you must read what dodd really meant by saying those words.
btw, i am still waiting for you to answer my question. you now believe that Christ is equal with God in essence.( i remember you do not believe Christ is equal with God in essence before but i thank God for opening your mind about this one after so many discussions hahaha) my question is, what is the essence of God?
mikeboll64,May wrote:[/quote]
Quote Most of those other christs and messiahs in scripture were also anointed with Holy Spirit, Charles. David, Moses, Samuel, etc. Mike,
PRODUCE SCRIPTURES PLEASE!
BOTH REGARDING JESUS CHRIST AND ALL THE REST!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (carmel @ May 29 2014,17:55) Nick, NEVERTHELESS
GOD WAS IN HIMSELF!
Hi Charles,“God was in himself”
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgmikeboll64,May wrote:[/quote]
Quote IN THIS CASE GOD ALMIGHTY, AND JESUS CHRIST!
Yep, you nailed it, Charles!Clear and undeniable proof that “Jesus Christ” is one, and “God Almighty” is another. :
Mike,
YES AND HOW!
FIRST AND FOREMOST:
I NEVER THROUGHOUT MY POSTS DENIED THAT GOD THE FATHER AND HIS SON ,WERE NOT TWO PERSONS!
BUT YOUR POINT DOES’T PROVE
THAT THEY ARE NOT STILL ONE GOD ! SINCE NO ONE KNOWS WHAT GOD IS!
NOW IN ORDER TO KNOW WHERE I NAILED IT!
READ THIS NOW:
Ephissians1:3 Blessed by
the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with spiritual blessings in heavenly places, in Christ:
NOW!
WHY DIDN'T PAUL SAY:
Blessed BY God the Father, and BY the Lord Jesus Christ……
LIKE HE DID WITH THE FIRST ONE?
WHAT MADE HIM WRITE IT TO THE WAY IT IS?
WITH THE ARTICLE , “THE”,
WITHOUT THE USE OF COMMAS,
AND WITH THE PREPOSITION “OF”
WHICH IN FACT ARE CLEAR INDICATIONS THAT THE GOD AND FATHER IS A A TITLE RELATED TO JESUS CHRIST
SO JESUS CHRIST IS
BOTH GOD AND FATHER TO US! FLESH BEINGS! THROUGH HIS DEATH!
CREATOR AND FATHER OF ALL THE UNIVERSES!
THROUGH HIS OWN BLOOD!
Hebrews 1:10 And: Thou in the beginning, O Lord, didst found the earth: and the works of thy hands are the heavens.
MANIFESTED HIS ALMIGHTINESS BY HIS OWN WORK ON EARTH FOR FORTY DAYS,
NO NAME IS MORE POWERFUL THAN JESUS CHRIST,OVER ALL THE UNIVERSES!
AND NO OTHER GOD, BAR JESUS CHRIST WOULD EVER ENTER IN THIS WORLD AGAIN TO ESTABLISH HIS OWN UNIQUE KINGDOM ON EARTH ONCE AND FOR ALL!
AS:
CHILDREN OF GOD!
THROUGH
THE ONLY TRUE GOD,AND JESUS CHRIST!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Ed wrote:[/quote]
Quote Where does he go when he is not in himself? Edj,
Read this revelation!
In what should God’s omnipotence be extolled, if HE could not contain HIMSELF WITHIN HIMSELF WHATEVER HE IS, so that He is only felt or seen as is most suitable for the time, place and persons?
For since the creation of Heaven and earth GOD has worked for the redemption of all, more by the wisdom of His BENIGNITY than by the power of His Majesty. And this benignity of wisdom shines most in His tolerance towards the imperfect, leading them, even by their own free will, into the way of perfection.
SO ACCORDING TO THE ABOVE:
GOD IS IN ALL OF US, AND IN THE SAME TIM HE IS ALSO IN HIMSELF!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (carmel @ May 30 2014,20:47) Ed wrote:[/quote]
Quote Where does he go when he is not in himself? Edj,
Read this revelation!
In what should God’s omnipotence be extolled, if HE could not contain HIMSELF WITHIN HIMSELF WHATEVER HE IS, so that He is only felt or seen as is most suitable for the time, place and persons?
For since the creation of Heaven and earth GOD has worked for the redemption of all, more by the wisdom of His BENIGNITY than by the power of His Majesty. And this benignity of wisdom shines most in His tolerance towards the imperfect, leading them, even by their own free will, into the way of perfection.
SO ACCORDING TO THE ABOVE:
GOD IS IN ALL OF US, AND IN THE SAME TIM HE IS ALSO IN HIMSELF!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
CHARLESQuote GOD IS IN ALL OF US, AND IN THE SAME TIM HE IS ALSO IN HIMSELF! IN MY 5O YEARS OF BIBLE STUDIES I NEVER CAME ACROSS THAT SCRIPTURE ;COULD YOU POINTED OUT FOR ME
terraricca,May wrote:[/quote]
Quote God ,uses three things ;the reconciliation waters ,the holy spirit (form of a dove) and his words said at the time , this will answer your question
Terraricca,
ARE YOU AFRAID TO ANSWER?
THIS WAS MY QUESTION:
WHAT DID THE FATHER USE TO ANOINT HIS SON WITH?
DID HE USE OIL?
OR
DID HE USE THE HOLY SPIRIT ?
SO WHICH OF THE ABOVE IS RIGHT?
AND WHY?
Peace and love on Jesus
Charles[
Quote (carmel @ May 30 2014,20:56) terraricca,May wrote:[/quote]
Quote God ,uses three things ;the reconciliation waters ,the holy spirit (form of a dove) and his words said at the time , this will answer your question
Terraricca,
ARE YOU AFRAID TO ANSWER?
THIS WAS MY QUESTION:
WHAT DID THE FATHER USE TO ANOINT HIS SON WITH?
DID HE USE OIL?
OR
DID HE USE THE HOLY SPIRIT ?
SO WHICH OF THE ABOVE IS RIGHT?
AND WHY?
Peace and love on Jesus
Charles[
charlesi have answered that question ,i guess you did not like my answer
mikeboll64,May wrote:[/quote]
Quote ell, if it said “firstborn of every COW”, then we would know he was the first COW ever made. If it said, “firstborn of every MAN”, then we would know he was the first MAN ever made.
And so on, and so on. So “firstborn of every CREATURE” obviously means he was the first CREATURE ever made.
Mike,
WHAT IF GOD WAS IN THAT FIRST EVER CREATURE WHATEVER IT MAY BE IN ORDER TO KEEP IT IN EXISTENCE,SINCE NOTHING EXIST WITHOUT GOD'S PRESENCE! NO MATTER HOW
WOULD ALSO GOD BE THE FIRST EVER CREATURE?
YES OR NO
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
terraricca,May wrote:[/quote]
Quote I have answered that question ,i guess you did not like my answer Terraricca,
AGAIN!
IN PLAIN SIMPLE ENGLISH!
WHAT DID THE FATHER USE TO ANOINT HIS SON WITH?
DID HE USE OIL?
OR
DID HE USE HIS HOLY SPIRIT ?
CHOOSE AND DO NOT BLAH, BLAH, BLAH……………
SO WHICH OF THE ABOVE IS RIGHT?
AND WHY?
ONE OF THEM IS PERFECTLY RIGHT!
TRUTH HURTS
Peace and love on Jesus
Charles
terraricca,May wrote:[/quote]
Quote IN MY 5O YEARS OF BIBLE STUDIES I NEVER CAME ACROSS THAT SCRIPTURE ;COULD YOU POINTED OUT FOR ME Terraricca
OMNIPRESENCE
EVEN IN HIMSELF!
SINCE HE IS ALSO
OMNIPOTENCE
IT SEEMS YOU DOUBT BOTH GOD ALMIGHTY'S POWER, AND WISDOM!
PAUL SAID:
GOD'S WISDOM IS FOOLISHNESS FOR THE WISE OF THE WORLD!
AND
GOD'S FOOLISHNESS IS WISER THAN THE WISDOM OF THE WORLD!
peace and love in Jesus
Charles
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
