Mikeboll64 vs francis

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 11 2011,10:57)

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 11 2011,10:05) Irene said: Quote The Father YAHWEH always existed. God said, “I will BECOME a father to Him” (2 Samuel 7:14 and Hebrews 1:1-3). If God BECAME a Father, then He was NOT always a Father.   Quote The Son did not, He came forth from His Father. Jesus BECAME the Son when He was baptized at the Jordan. he was officially installed as Son at His resurrection. He was the ETERNAL Word before all of it. Roo Jr. Hi Jr, Are you forgetting about these verses? Was YHVH not a “Father” then? Job.38:4-7 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?  declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest?  or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened?  or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

First, I was answering the point that God was the Father of Jesus before His baptism at the Jordan. Second, the Hebrew word in Job 38:7 is sometimes translated “angels” and we know that angels were never called a son of God (Hebrews 1:5).

Jack

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi Mike

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 11 2011,08:07)

Most do not realize I created this thread in the debates thread and I don't know for sure but apparently Mike requested to t8 to move the thread because it is a distraction. Huh? What have you got to hide Mike and how is it a distraction since it is a completely different thread. Shouldn’t it be in the same category so others can see the responses? What about this Mike?

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,18:59)

Really Keith?    You think I would try to HIDE from you and Jack and Dennison?       I track you guys down all the time, corner you, and watch as YOU run and hide!

That’s funny Mike. Then why did you move the thread?

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,18:59)

In case you haven't noticed, you're doing it right now on this thread.  You guys are so fired up and sure that there is only one real god who has ever been given the title of “god” in scripture, that you are willing to ignore the fact that He is specifically named as THE FATHER…………..NOT THE SON.

No Mike, we are not saying others are not given the title “god” in scriptures. What we are saying is they are so-called gods and not gods at all because there is “Only One True God” and YHWH himself says there are no other gods beside him! For any one to be “The True God” he would have to have all the characteristics and attributes of the “Only One True God”. Oh that’s right Jesus has all the characteristics and attributes of the Father. In fact Jesus says if you see him then you have seen God. (John 14:8, 9) Would the “Only Begotten Son of God” be antithetical to God? Are you less human to your Father? When are you going to get that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are One God, and that they share One Essence that makes God, God? Jesus sits next to the Father ruling as God, all authority and power in his hands, including all judgment, in fact by him all things consist. (Col 1:17) It’s a “red herring” for you to say “and who gave him that power”, because no one but “God” could contain all the Glory, Authority, and Power of an infinite God. Until you can prove that “All” doesn't mean all then you are simply building straw men arguments. So Jesus is not a so-called god. Not to mention when was he given “All authority and power”, wasn't it after he was the Word that was with God and was God, when he was in very nature God and emptied himself and took on the likeness of sinful flesh and appeared as a man or God in the flesh? Who could do that but God?

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,18:59)

And at one point, it was actually THE SON who was telling us who the only true God was……….and I don't remember him saying “WE” or “US” or “AND THE SON”.    I DO, however, remember him clearly distinguishing himself as someone OTHER THAN “the only true God” by saying he was the one who was SENT BY “the only true God”.

Once again you commit a fallacy because the scripture in no way implies Jesus is not One God with the Father, in fact Jesus says that the prerequisite to having “Eternal Life” is knowing both the Father and the Son. John says Jesus is the “Eternal Life”, the Word that was with God and was/is God. (1 John 1:1-3 – 1 John 5:20 -John 1:1)

When are you going to believe these scriptures Mike? Where is the scripture that says Jesus is not God? Surely someone of stature in that day would challenge Jesus being called God by the Apostles. Ah but we do have scriptures that says Jesus is God and we know he is not a so-called God or a false God because he shares the same attributes of the Father, in fact he is the visible image of the invisible God. To see Jesus was to see God Mike. There is “Only One True God Mike” and Jesus is “The True God” One with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,18:59)

But about the thread, I DID ask t8 to move it.  People like Astari were confused because both threads had the same basic title and were both in the debates category.  And people were posting in my actual debate with Francis.  (Don't you remeber Astari's confusion as to why he could post in one and not the other?)

And we know who Astari is don’t we? The thread title should be enough for someone to not be confused. JA has been here long enough to know the difference.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,18:59)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I though the debate threads were for only specific posters who are identified in the first post along with the rules.  This is an open discussion with many posters………why would you put it in the debates section?

It is to give others a chance to respond to the debate. Why do you have a problem with that?

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,18:59)

At any rate, I wasn't trying to hide anything.  I'm GLAD you three are paying attention to the debate………..and I hope you will learn a little something from it.

Then why have it moved? Your excuse about JA seems to be a little weak to me.

Blessings WJ

[Istari]

Irene,
There are THREE occasions of Jesus being Son of God.
1) when he was created like all the other Angels
2) when he came as Man in the Flesh
3) when he was raised up and made High Priest to God (Romans 1:4)

The third and last was the most important because this was when he became the Everlasting Son, the Eternal Son.
This was when he was 'Begotten', became Begotten of God and God said,'You are my Son, Todayy I have become your father'.

See that God did not say this to him when he was an Angel, when he was a Messenger.

A true Son of God is he who has the Holy Spirit.

Jesus was given the FULL Measure of the Holy Spirit when he was raised up from the dead and taken up to Heaven. Before that he was 'only' Anointed with the Holy Spirit.
Anointing means 'setting aside for Kingship' as was done to Saul, David, Solomon, etc.
The Anointed one still had to prove their worthiness and this Jesus did completely.

In John where Jesus is called 'Begotten' John is referencing Jesus as he was and is, already raised up. This is what Mikeboll64 cannot understand. John is talking about the risen Christ.
John says that God sent his 'Only Begotten Son' but where in Scriptures is anything said about Jesus being Begotten before he was raised up? Nowhere!
Just say of a renowned person,'the great actor came from a poor illiterate background'
Now, was that actor 'great' while he was poor and illiterate?
The Hero dived into the icy water to rescue the drowning lady.
Was the Hero a hero before he dived in and rescued the lady?
For sure God sent his Son who was the most righteous in Heaven from among all his other Sons and many people misunderstand thinking that God only had ONE Son, but simply ignore all the Scriptures that show God's other sons because of tradition of teaching.
Jesus himself tells us that God has many Sons, and these are the Princes, the Principle Sons of God, they who receive God's word and carry out God's word, as he did.
But distorted teaching bury this truth in favour of Earthly minded ideas of Sonship.

Sonship to Man means a procreated offspring.
Since all Spirit comes from God, we are all, initially, Sons of God, but fall away when sin enters us and enter us it does in the earliest instance of life, even as a baby.
But God sees Sonship as anyone, everyone, who receives his word and carries it out. He also gives due allowance for sin in them: Moses was Son of God, yet sinned; David was Son of God, yet Sinned, Abraham, Solomon, Ezekiel, Daniel…all sinned.

When you can see with Spiritual Eyes, all these things become clear and are profound revelations.

Reach for the Spiritual Mind and the Scriptures start to make sense and you will see the hidden links, the fractal hooks that hold Scriptures in unity and truth.

It is this lack of Spiritualness that causes the disharmony in understanding, added to personal ignorance and demanding to be right, to be seen as right, forcing untruth for the sake of desiring ones own ideas to be ratified by others yet being incapable of joining the ends of discord, or datcord!
Reach for the Spiritual Truth and open your eyes.

But be prepared to be 'blocked' by those who seek disharmony and favour untruth, even if 'well meant and honestly misled'.
If Jesus was crucified for speaking Truth, should the righteous Man not also expect to be crucified like his great Lord and King.

Who is the Barabbas in this forum?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi Mike

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 11 2011,08:07)

Hi Dennison I created this thread because Francis is making a very good case against Mikes Arian, and Polytheistic views.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,21:21)

Yet, I haven't seen you guys comment too much on this “very good case” he's making.  In fact, all I read today was how you all agreed that I “changed his words” or something like that.

Did you even read the opening statement? Haven’t you seen the times we have quoted parts of the debate?

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,21:21)

But I didn't change anything, I just posted truth.  And today I posted even more truth to him to explain the truth I posted last time.

No one has said you have changed anything, what you have done is put words in Francis mouth and then tried to build a case on that. But Francis is smart enough to see your tactics and call you out on it.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,21:21)

Pay attention guys:  He's either going to go for the “But there's ONLY ONE GOD, so there!”, like you guys do…………or he will research and accept the truth I've posted.

No he will not throw away the truth to accept a lie. He like us believes that there is “Only One True God” and none other.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,21:21)

I didn't make this stuff up, guys.

You could have fooled me.  

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,21:21)

It's all right there in the words of scripture and in the words of the scholars who have tirelessly studied those scriptures and have defined the Hebrew and Greek words for us.   Consider these scriptures: Exodus 21 KJV 6Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. Exodus 22 KJV 8If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour's goods. 9For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour. The bolded “judges” above are all the word “elohim”, which means “gods”.  And “elohim” means: 'elohiym 1) (plural)   1a) rulers, judges   1b) divine ones   1c) angels   1d) gods 2) (plural intensive – singular meaning)   2a) god, goddess   2b) godlike one   2c) works or special possessions of God     2d) the (true) God   2e) God Know of what you speak, young Dennison.  “God” with a capital “G” is only two of the nine definitions given for the word above.  And even then, it still simply means “ruler” or “judge”.  It was used of humans, angels, Jesus, and the Omniscient Being Who Created All.

Yes and they are translated accordingly. If the context dictates they are judges or a man, or ‘a god” then it is translated as such. So what is your point Mike, the translators didn’t translate it God but judge because they were not gods at all?

Gods have supreme, ultimate power or in Jesus case “All authority and Power”. But according to your definition just about anyone can be “a god”.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 10 2011,21:21)

Keith, will you go as far as saying these “judges” in Exodus were “false judges” or “imposters”?

No Mike, because they are judges as it is rightly translated. Are they gods? If they are considered as gods by men (or Mike) then they would be Polytheist and are making idols out of men and those judges would be false gods for there is “Only One True God”. Remember the Romans considered Caesar “a God” but was he “a god” at all? Sure he was in the hearts and minds of the Romans because he usurped authority over them as a false god or an idol but he was not “a True God” was he?

Blessings WJ

[Baker]

Quote (Istari @ Jan. 12 2011,03:51)

Irene, There are THREE occasions of Jesus being Son of God. 1) when he was created like all the other Angels 2) when he came as Man in the Flesh 3) when he was raised up and made High Priest to God (Romans 1:4) The third and last was the most important because this was when he became the Everlasting Son, the Eternal Son. This was when he was 'Begotten', became Begotten of God and God said,'You are my Son, Todayy I have become your father'. See that God did not say this to him when he was an Angel, when he was a Messenger. A true Son of God is he who has the Holy Spirit. Jesus was given the FULL Measure of the Holy Spirit when he was raised up from the dead and taken up to Heaven. Before that he was 'only' Anointed with the Holy Spirit. Anointing means 'setting aside for Kingship' as was done to Saul, David, Solomon, etc. The Anointed one still had to prove their worthiness and this Jesus did completely. In John where Jesus is called 'Begotten' John is referencing Jesus as he was and is, already raised up. This is what Mikeboll64 cannot understand. John is talking about the risen Christ. John says that God sent his 'Only Begotten Son' but where in Scriptures is anything said about Jesus being Begotten before he was raised up? Nowhere! Just say of a renowned person,'the great actor came from a poor illiterate background' Now, was that actor 'great' while he was poor and illiterate? The Hero dived into the icy water to rescue the drowning lady. Was the Hero a hero before he dived in and rescued the lady? For sure God sent his Son who was the most righteous in Heaven from among all his other Sons and many people misunderstand thinking that God only had ONE Son, but simply ignore all the Scriptures that show God's other sons because of tradition of teaching. Jesus himself tells us that God has many Sons, and these are the Princes, the Principle Sons of God, they who receive God's word and carry out God's word, as he did. But distorted teaching bury this truth in favour of Earthly minded ideas of Sonship. Sonship to Man means a procreated offspring. Since all Spirit comes from God, we are all, initially, Sons of God, but fall away when sin enters us and enter us it does in the earliest instance of life, even as a baby. But God sees Sonship as anyone, everyone, who receives his word and carries it out. He also gives due allowance for sin in them: Moses was Son of God, yet sinned; David was Son of God, yet Sinned, Abraham, Solomon, Ezekiel, Daniel…all sinned. When you can see with Spiritual Eyes, all these things become clear and are profound revelations. Reach for the Spiritual Mind and the Scriptures start to make sense and you will see the hidden links, the fractal hooks that hold Scriptures in unity and truth. It is this lack of Spiritualness that causes the disharmony in understanding, added to personal ignorance and demanding to be right, to be seen as right, forcing untruth for the sake of desiring ones own ideas to be ratified by others yet being incapable of joining the ends of discord, or datcord! Reach for the Spiritual Truth and open your eyes. But be prepared to be 'blocked' by those who seek disharmony and favour untruth, even if 'well meant and honestly misled'. If Jesus was crucified for speaking Truth, should the righteous Man not also expect to be crucified like his great Lord and King. Who is the Barabbas in this forum?

You don't believe that Jesus exsisted before His birth on earth? Go to the Preexisting tread there are over40 Scriptures that proof it….

Peace Irene

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 11 2011,03:27)

Mikeboll said: Quote Keith, will you go as far as saying these “judges” in Exodus were “false judges” or “imposters”? When applied to God the word “elohim” means “Supreme ruler.” Jesus Christ is called “our only Sovereign ruler.” Therefore, the word “despotes” when applied to Jesus is equivalent to the word “elohim” when applied to God. Which is greater: A supreme ruler or a sovereign ruler? It is obvious therefore that the word “God” as Mike defines it would be equivalent to the word “Despotes.” So Mike still has not overcome WJ's point that if the expression “only true God” in reference to the Father excludes Jesus, then the expression “only true Despotes” in reference to Christ excludes the Father. Add to this dilemna that a “supreme ruler” (the Father) is not greater than a “sovereign ruler” (Jesus Christ). Roo Jr.

Hi Jack Jr

So true!

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Francis says..

Quote

In a gentleman's debate… whoever starts first and introduces novel material, the other person following should be  allowed to have the last word.  That is how I understand debates are handled.

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 11 2011,11:10)

Yielding the last word is not one of Mike's strengths. And when his opponent yields the last word Mike thinks it's weakness. He thinks he won.

Hi Jack Jr

How true again.  

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

HI All

Francis posted some great points Here…

[begin quote]…

Hello Mike…

Quote

Francis So right off the bat, you first switched “God” for “god”… and then you sneaked in the words/sentence: Jesus is  called by the title “god”.  I never said those words and neither does Hebrews 1:8. Mike Francis, did you know, or could you do some research before we move forward, and acknowledge or refute the two following points? 1.  “God” is only a title that means “ruler”, and has been given to many people in scripture – including the Omniscient Being who created all other beings……….AND……….to mere mortal men, among others. 2.  The Koine Greek written language did not differentiate between upper and lower case letters, so any time you see an upper case or lower case “g” in the word “god”, it has been added in by English translators. Therefore, Hebrews 1:8 IS a scripture in which Jesus is called by the title “god”, like I said.  And in verse nine, both Jesus and his god are called by the title “god”.   And we know that “god” means the same in English as “elohim” means in Hebrew and “theos” means in Greek – RULER.  And knowing this, we can understand Hebrews 1:8-9 to be referring to the “ruler” Jesus, who has been set above his companions by HIS “ruler”. So let's FORGET about capital letters, for there were none in the original writing of Hebrews.  And let's REMEMBER that “theos” is merely a title meaning “ruler”.  With those things in mind, look at the scripture once more.  Show me again, without using any captial letters, how Hebrews 1:8-9 is saying anything other than what I just posted and bolded in the paragraph above.

Mike… the Law of Identity is iron clad and non-negotiable.  IF we don't understand what a word was meant by the person using that word, then we can't communicate.  This is a simple fact.

For example… look at all the words you've used so far in your posts to me.  Well… what did you mean by EACH of those words you used?  Well… if I didn't know what those words meant to you… and if I rendered those words that you use differently than the way you rendered them, how can we communicate?  The answer of course is that we CAN'T.  This should be very obvious.

Now look at what you specifically wrote to me above.  You just wrote this:

“God” is only a title that means “ruler”, and has been given to many people in scripture – including the Omniscient Being who created all other beings……….AND……….to mere mortal men, among others.

Well… which is it?  If God means “ruler”, then why not use the word “ruler” in the first place?  Is there a reason why all the translations (including NWT) uses the word “God” instead of “ruler”?  Is there significance to that? (I think there is)

And if “ruler” or “God” can mean both mere mortal men and the Omniscient Being… which is it?   What good is it to us if we don't know what the the Hebrews author meant?

You see, I believe that when the translators of Hebrews 1:8 used “God” with a capital “G”, they are telling us that the Hebrews writer was first saying that it was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Moses speaking… and that He was speaking to Jesus… who is the God  Abraham, Isaac, and Moses.   The translators are helping us (who are not experts in Greek or Hebrew) to understand that the Hebrews author was NOT talking about mere mortal men, among others as you put it.  Otherwise why not simply say so?  Why not translate the word to “god” instead of to “God”?   Or why not translate the word directly to “ruler”?  Why not tell us that the writer meant mere mortal men and not something else?  Obviously, his readers understood what he was saying.

Indeed, isn't that the issue before us?  Aren't we trying to understand if Jesus is God or not?  Remember, I told you what I meant when I used the word “God” with a capital letter “G”.  And I think the translators are telling you the same thing.  They are telling us what the Hebrews author meant.  The Hebrews author did not mean mere mortal men and so that is why they didn't use “god”… but instead they used “God”.

So for you to make the above statement… without doing what I had asked you to do… (which was that each time you use the word “god” you CLARIFY what you mean by that word)… you aren't saying anything about what Hebrews 1:8 means.  Even the translators understand this and therefore they capitalized the word God so that we know what the Hebrews author were communicating to us.  The Hebrews author was obviously not talking about “mere mortal men” in Hebrews 1:8.

Instead, you just say that the Greek word means “ruler” and can be applied to both the Omniscient Being and to mere mortal men, among others.  Well… how does that HELP ANYONE??  That doesn't tell anyone anything of value!!

Maybe the title ruler can be applied to a lion since lions are called the “king of the Jungle” after all.

Well this of course is all nonsense.  The Greeks were very rational people (logic and philosophy) and so they spoke with clarity and meaning and each word they used was understood by the audience at the time.  If it wasn't, then no communication was possible.

So as I see it, what you've basically done is skirt the issue before us which is the same issue that you earlier admitted was the “problem” that we needed to address.  The Prima Facie question before us is not if Jesus was a “ruler” (who cares if Jesus was a ruler if even Satan can be a ruler or if even an animal like a lion can be a ruler)… but the question is if Jesus is God.  That is the issue.  That is the Prima Facie question.  That is the “problem” which even you have admitted to in your previous post to me.  

And the fact is, an overwhelming number of Greek Translators are saying that the author of Hebrews 1:8 was communicating to the reader at the time that Jesus was called “God” with a capital “G” by “God” with a capital “G”… the same God that the Jews worshiped in the OT… the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and Moses and David and Solomon.

Hebrews 1:8 (New International Version, ©2010)
But about the Son he says,  “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (New American Standard Bible)
But of the Son He says, “YOUR THRONE, O God, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.

Hebrews 1:8 (The Message)
But he says to the Son, You're God, and on the throne for good;  your rule makes everything right.
s.

Hebrews 1:8 (Amplified Bible)
But as to the Son, He says to Him, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever (to the ages of the ages), and the scepter of Your kingdom is a scepter of absolute righteousness (of justice and straightforwardness).

Hebrews 1:8 (New Living Translation)
But to the Son he says,  “Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. You rule with a scepter of justice.”

Hebrews 1:8 (King James Version)
But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (English Standard Version)
But of the Son he says,  “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,  the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (Contemporary Eng
lish Version)
But God says about his Son,  “You are God,  and you will rule  as King forever! Your royal power brings about justice.

Hebrews 1:8 (New King James Version)
But to the Son He says:  “ Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;  A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (New Century Version)
But God said this about his Son:  “God, your throne will last forever and ever.  You will rule your kingdom with fairness.

Hebrews 1:8 (Common English Bible)
But he says to his Son,  God, your throne is forever  and your kingdom’s scepter is a rod of justice.

Hebrews 1:8 (21st Century King James Version)
But unto the Son He saith, “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Thy Kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (American Standard Version)
but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (Young's Literal Translation)
and unto the Son: `Thy throne, O God, [is] to the age of the age; a scepter of righteousness [is] the scepter of thy reign;

Hebrews 1:8 (Darby Translation)
but as to the Son, Thy throne, O God, [is] to the age of the age, and a sceptre of uprightness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
but about the Son:  Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,  and the scepter of Your kingdom is a scepter of justice.

Hebrews 1:8 (New International Reader's Version)
But here is what he says about the Son.  “You are God. Your throne will last for ever and ever.  Your kingdom will be ruled by what is right.

Hebrews 1:8 (Wycliffe New Testament)
But to the Son he saith, God, thy throne is into the world of world [into the world of worlds]; a rod of equity is the rod of thy realm;

Hebrews 1:8 (Worldwide English (New Testament))
But here is what God says about his Son: `O God, you will sit and rule for ever. You will rule in the right way.

Hebrews 1:8 (New International Version – UK)
But about the Son he says,  Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the sceptre of your kingdom.

Hebrews 1:8 (Today’s New International Version, ©2005)
But about the Son he says,  “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.

AND THE FOLLOWING!!

Hebrews 1:8-9  (Online Bible New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures)

But with reference to the Son: “God is your throne forever and ever, and [the] scepter of your kingdom is the scepter of uprightness.  You loved righteousness, and you hated lawlessness. That is why God, your God, anointed you with [the] oil of exultation more than your partners.”

So what can we learn from the above?  None of the translations use the word “ruler”.  All the Translations use a capital “G” instead of a little “g”.  Why?  What other reason is there but the fact that Hebrews 1:8 was NOT referring to mere mortal men ?

So it appears to me that your beef is not with me, but with the vast majority (if not all) translation experts and scholars.

Anyway… if you believe that the wrod “God” in Hebrews 1:8 was not referring to the God of Abraham and Moses and Isaac, then you have the burden of proof to show why you disagree with all the Translators above… even the translators of the New World Translation who are not trinitarians.

I understand that the NWT doesn't say that Jesus was called God… but the point is that they did show that the word “god” needed to be capitlized when speaking of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Moses.  And that is my point!!

Even the NWT did not use the word “ruler”… and neither did they use the small letter “g” in the word “God” when referring to to the God of Abraham so as to make sure that the readers understood that “God” with a capital letter “G” DOES NOT refer to mere mortal men in Hebrews 1:8.

Oh… but maybe you are one of those conspiracy guys like Jesse Ventura, and you believe that all the above translators are deliberately foisting upon the general public THE BIG LIE.

If you are, I would gently encourage you to seek a job with Jesse. He can use someone on his staff like you.

Looking forward to your response.

God Bless
Respectfully
Francis

[end quote]

The point that he is making is that Mike thinks that he knows better than all the 100s of Translators that brought us the scriptures that we have.

I have repeatedly said that the antitrins should get together a bunch of Biblical Hebrew and Greek scholars to come up with their own translation. But why haven't they done that?

Oh thats right there is a group of antitrins that created thier own translation and that is the Jehovah Witnesses. However it should be noted that not a single one on their translating commitee were Biblical Hebrew or Greek scholars. Not a single one could read a single sentence in Hebrew or Greek.

So why hasn't a non Trinitarian group translated their own version?

It is because when they understand the Hebrew and Greek, then they know that to try and translate a antitrin version would only get shot down by the cream of Hebrew and Greek scholorship.

Its funny how so many here put on like they know more than the experts.

Blessings WJ

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Mike said:

Quote

I track you guys down all the time, corner you, and watch as YOU run and hide!

Crapola! I am just trying to get away from this being an obsession and that's all.

jack

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 11 2011,15:25)

Mike said: Quote I track you guys down all the time, corner you, and watch as YOU run and hide! Crapola! I am just trying to get away from this being an obsession and that's all. jack

Jack

This guy truly is so full of himself! I Love you Mike but your statement is full of hoodoo!

Have you not realized that you have to have the last word?

Does that come from your childhood or something?

Like it has been said, just because we give you the last word it is not a sign of weakness but in fact quite the opposite!

Blessings Keith

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 12 2011,04:25)

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 11 2011,03:27) Mikeboll said: Quote Keith, will you go as far as saying these “judges” in Exodus were “false judges” or “imposters”? When applied to God the word “elohim” means “Supreme ruler.” Jesus Christ is called “our only Sovereign ruler.” Therefore, the word “despotes” when applied to Jesus is equivalent to the word “elohim” when applied to God. Which is greater: A supreme ruler or a sovereign ruler? It is obvious therefore that the word “God” as Mike defines it would be equivalent to the word “Despotes.” So Mike still has not overcome WJ's point that if the expression “only true God” in reference to the Father excludes Jesus, then the expression “only true Despotes” in reference to Christ excludes the Father. Add to this dilemna that a “supreme ruler” (the Father) is not greater than a “sovereign ruler” (Jesus Christ). Roo Jr. Hi Jack Jr So true!   WJ

Keith,

It seems that Mike may not know what a synonym is. It is two or more words that have the same meaning. Mike can't see that his definition of “elohim” as “ruler” works against him for its equivalent “despotes” means “sovereign ruler.”

John 17:3: “You are the only true Supreme Ruler” (the Father).

Jude 4: “Our only Sovereign Ruler and Lord Jesus Christ.”

Yet Mike cannot compute that there is no difference in the rank of the two Persons.

Jack

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Keith said to Mikeboll:

Quote

What we are saying is they are so-called gods and not gods at all because there is “Only One True God” and YHWH himself says there are no other gods beside him!

We echo Paul who said that they are no gods at all. Jesus said that all shepherds before Him were “thieves and robbers.” Then he called them “gods” (John 10). Therefore, all gods before Christ were thieves and robbers and Christ was the true God.

Jack

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Keith said:

Quote

Like it has been said, just because we give you the last word it is not a sign of weakness but in fact quite the opposite!

It takes a lot of strength not to reply to Mike especially when you know he is going to hang from the top of the empire state building and beat his chest about it.

Jack

[princess]

really jr,
are the visuals necessary
perhaps T8 should give you a child's corner of some sort, like jr's corner of pictures
then you could make fun of people there
any truth seeker would not visit though
for it is not the true message that should be portrayed
but you and wj are the exclusion to the rule yes?
you have been granted permission, by your lord to mimic, mock others.

what a god you have.

[SimplyForgiven]

Princess,
I wonder whats worse,
To be upfront about it,

or the insults that are written in between in the lines,
in the dark corners,
in silence, and behind our backs.
with trickeray and false implications.

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (princess @ Jan. 12 2011,08:05)

really jr, are the visuals necessary perhaps T8 should give you a child's corner of some sort, like jr's corner of pictures then you could make fun of people there any truth seeker would not visit though for it is not the true message that should be portrayed but you and wj are the exclusion to the rule yes? you have been granted permission, by your lord to mimic, mock others. what a god you have.

Is Mike's beating his chest any less childish? When Mike stops beating his chest, then….

What a “god” Mike has that he cannot be gracious when people don't reply to him.

Jack

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 12 2011,08:43)

Princess, I wonder whats worse, To be upfront about it, or the insults that are written in between in the lines, in the dark corners, in silence, and behind our backs. with trickeray and false implications.

SF,

Mike says I am running and hiding after I PMed him telling him that I have another home now and that I won't be spending that much time here. Yet he says that I “run and hide” after I told him that I would not be replying much. He is acting childish and insecure.

KJ Jr.

[Baker]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 12 2011,03:00)

Irene said: Quote KJ  You took that Scripture out of context and applied it to Jesus, it is NOT JESUS read it all. Irene, It is applied to Jesus in Hebrews 1:1-6 Quote 1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself[a] purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. The Son Exalted Above Angels   5 For to which of the angels did He ever say:      “ You are My Son,      Today I have begotten You”?[c]   And again:      “ I will be to Him a Father,      And He shall be to Me a Son”?[d] 6 But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says:      “ Let all the angels of God worship Him.”[e] Jack

I am not talking about Hebrew.  I am talking about 2 Samuel. That is not Jesus. That is the first Scripture you quoted……
Irene

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 12 2011,03:10)

Francis said to Mikeboll: Quote ut in this debate, anything you bring up… I will take a hard look at it.. and if necessary, I will respond to it.  So  if you don't want to discuss the Creed and Eusebius stuff anymore, then as long as you don't bring it up again, I won't  either. Don't expect Mike to stop with Eusebius. He never wears out. Mike ignores that Eusebius signed the creed which anathematized him and his Arain views. Quote In a gentleman's debate… whoever starts first and introduces novel material, the other person following should be  allowed to have the last word.  That is how I understand debates are handled. Yielding the last word is not one of Mike's strengths. And when his opponent yields the last word Mike thinks it's weakness. He thinks he won. Jack

Why the ad hominems, Jack?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 12 2011,03:31)

No Mike, we are not saying others are not given the title “god” in scriptures. What we are saying is they are so-called gods and not gods at all because there is “Only One True God” and YHWH himself says there are no other gods beside him!

Hi Keith,

Then I guess you better list Jesus along with all the other “so- called gods” and “not gods at all”, because the only true God is said to be the Father.  What part of this don't you get?  

The Father, the Father, the Father.  That is who Paul says our ONE God is, and that is who Jesus says is “the only true God”.  

How in the world do you come up with “Jesus is INCLUDED in this”?    Is Jesus the Father?  Well then, he's not included in the statement about “the ONLY true God”, is he?

peace and love,
mike

[Author]

Posts