- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by Nick.
- AuthorPosts
- June 24, 2008 at 4:21 am#93854NickHassanParticipant
Hi,
Yes that is one translation.
ThanksJune 24, 2008 at 4:43 am#93861LightenupParticipantQuote (chosenone @ June 24 2008,00:20) The correct translation and sentence structure of John1:1. 1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word.
2 This was in the beginning toward God.Concordant Literal New Testament.
Blessings.
Hi Chosenone,
I believe that the last clause of John 1:1 has “word” as the subject and “God” as the predicate nominative. That is why the article is with “word” and not with “God”. So the correct translation as far as I understand the Greek is “the word was God”. The subject is doing the action. The predicate nominative is never the subject and therefore doesn't do the action.
LUJune 24, 2008 at 5:35 am#93879gollamudiParticipantQuote (Nick Hassan @ June 24 2008,14:42) Hi GM,
The Word was WITH God.
Said three times in scripture so it is a proven fact.
Yes I agree with you Nick, but that doesn't make the impersonal “word” as a person or being. Then you create two God beings in the beginning. This is what I was argueing with you as polytheism.June 24, 2008 at 6:14 am#93885NickHassanParticipantHi GM,
You said
” He now became living word, a being who permanently carries God's word in Him to all which God used to do through His angels and prophets in O.T. “
Indeed. The living Word.June 24, 2008 at 7:52 am#93891gollamudiParticipantAmen to that if you agree with me in full.
June 24, 2008 at 10:14 am#93917NickHassanParticipantHi GM,
He became a living being in the beginning as the Word.
He is the principal witness to God in this time.June 24, 2008 at 10:22 am#93918gollamudiParticipantOH! my brother why do you go back again and again there?
Where is the proof for your saying : “He became a living being in the beginning as the word”?June 24, 2008 at 6:45 pm#93965NickHassanParticipantHi GM,
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN THEE.[ps2]
You call him the Word now.
God calls him the Word in the beginning.June 24, 2008 at 8:44 pm#93977Worshipping JesusParticipantQuote (Nick Hassan @ June 25 2008,06:45) Hi GM,
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN THEE.[ps2]
You call him the Word now.
God calls him the Word in the beginning.
NHI am sure GM is smarter than that.
You quote a post ressurection scripture. There is no scripture that calls Yeshua the Son before his incarnation!
Why do you seek to mislead by your tradition?
June 24, 2008 at 9:15 pm#93980NickHassanParticipantHi WJ,
Ps 2 is quoted in Heb 1 as being BEFORE the Son came into the world.heb1
5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
ORDER matters
June 24, 2008 at 9:57 pm#93992GeneBalthropParticipantNick….when he brings forth his son into the world, that was the day he was born, why do you think it's quoted in4 or 5 places (today) not yesterday it happened but it says (TODAY) (WHEN) he brigns forth His son, so when did he bring him forth when He was born obviously. Or He would not have said (TODAY) I have Begotten YOU if He had begotten Him in some time past before he said that. Plsm was a prophesy of a future event not a past event, that should be obvious to you. Your holding on to your false concepts.
IMO………gene
June 24, 2008 at 10:01 pm#93996NickHassanParticipantHi GB,
Indeed God brought forth His Son into the world.
That Son was begotten of Him alone.June 24, 2008 at 10:19 pm#93999GeneBalthropParticipantNick……so Mary didn't have any part, your forgetting He said (THIS DAY) not some time in the past. This day means today, God begot a Son, not yesterday or any time in the Past either. You just can't believe scripture and take it as it says. You are adding your own preexistence interpretations to the text. Unto US a child is Born, unto US a Son is given. He is called the son of (MAN) by His own mouth many times. And he is the son of God the same way we are, by the foreordained will of GOD. Quite separating Jesus from our likeness in (every way).
IMO……….gene
imo………gene
June 24, 2008 at 10:23 pm#94001NickHassanParticipantHi GB,
As son of God and Mary she did.
He is son of Man.But as Son of God?
June 24, 2008 at 10:35 pm#94005GeneBalthropParticipantNick……Are we not now sons of God, or was John lying. And when Jesus prayed (OUR) Father he didn't mean it because he only was a son of God. God is Spirit and can be in anyone He wants to, We are sons of God because God created all of man Kind not just Jesus, and Jesus knew that also.
If you and the others are going to push your belief that Jesus preexisted then you must deal with the Scriptures WJ Quoted You, or you have no right to push you belief systems, because those scriptures completely destroy it. So deal with them in fact anyone who believes Jesus preexisted and created everything needs to deal with them.
June 24, 2008 at 10:38 pm#94007NickHassanParticipantHi GB,
I agree we are.This is how we were reborn
Jn 112But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
So was he different?
Was he just born of the flesh?June 24, 2008 at 10:46 pm#94010GeneBalthropParticipantNick…….Jesus was exactly one of Us in every way without any difference and the same God working in Him is working in all who have His spirit in them according to the manifold gifts it produces in our lives. It All (ONE GOD) the FATHER Doing it in Us and in Jesus. No more no less. Exactly the same. Jesus is my brother from the same place i came from and has the same Father as i do, and when he returns i will be (EXACTLY AS HE IS)>For i shall see Him as he is.
imo…..gene
IMO………..gene
June 24, 2008 at 10:48 pm#94012NickHassanParticipantHi GB,
You missed the question.
Our rebirth has nothing to do with the flesh.
What of the Son of God, the firstborn of creation?June 24, 2008 at 11:09 pm#94015GeneBalthropParticipantNick…….First of all you have to establish of what creation? of all creation, but it doesn't say that, you are saying that, It could be the first creation of Man to become the exact (IMAGE) of God, the First to be born into the Kingdom of God ,of many brethren, you see your forcing the text to mean the creation of everything in existence, but it does not say that.
IMO…..gene
June 24, 2008 at 11:11 pm#94016Adam PastorParticipantGreetings one & all
A brother by the name of Sean Finnegan has written an excellent article on the topic of the pre-existence of Jesus in the book of John.
Enjoy!!
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.