Questions about Jesus

[NickHassan]

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,22:56)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,22:45) Hi not 3 “Isaiah 45:23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear” Plan? Hi Nick, Your post was to not3in1 but if I may offer an opinion. In Is 45:23, word is from the Hebrew word dabar, which means literally word,or spoken word. It doesn't carry the same meaning of the Greek word logos. So it does not mean plan, which is what you were inferring. Tim

Hi Tim,
Yes the only use of dabar that is shown also in the NT is Rom 10.8 and translated RHEMA and not logos.

But a word is not a plan.

If a policeman thought about asking you to drop your gun but said nothing would he be justified in shooting you?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,23:15)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:12) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,21:32) Hi W, None. But looking at Acts 10 I have yet to hear you explain this verse. “38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” Did God anoint God with God?? NH The Word/God (the Lord from heaven) who came down from heaven took on likeness of sinful flesh and was born the man Christ Jesus, then he baptised at the Jordan to fulfill all righteousness at which tim the Spirit(third person of the trinity) descended “upon” him and the Father(first person of the trinity)spoke from heaven saying this is my Beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. So you have the Father, Son and Holy Spirit present at his baptism! By the way NH, do you think that Jesus needed to be water baptised? Did he have to repent? It was to fulfill all righteousness. Hi W, Why should God need to be anointed? What did God lack that another person in God had to top God up? Why should a person be used to anoint another person?

NH

Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death!

[TimothyVI]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:30)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 19 2007,22:28) I think I have already given my understanding of John 1:1, so I will move on from there to verse 3:  The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way – In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine.  It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made.  Nothing was made outside its scope.  Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us. Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint. Verse 14 we have touched on a bit already, however let me say again that for me, the “Word” is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word “became flesh” as Jesus Christ.  To make John 1:14 support the Trinity, there must first be proof that Jesus existed before he was born and was called “the Word.”  I do not believe that such proof exists.  There is a large body of evidence, however, that Jesus was foreknown by God, and that the “the Word” refers to God's plan or purpose.  I contend that the meaning of the verse is straightforward.  God had a plan (the Word) and that plan became flesh when Jesus was conceived.  Thus, Jesus became “the Word in the flesh.” This does take us back to the subject of pre-existence.  And I would like to make a bold statement here – I believe that this doctrine of pre-existence has done more to weaken the foundation of the rational core of the Christian faith than have all the assaults of so-called “heretics” put together. Some of the reasons why I make this statement are, aside from it's mythological character, the “incarnation” creates other problems; the bible explicitly states that “God is not a man,” (Num. 23:19), which defines two distinct categories, God and man.  In terms of symbolic logic, it could be stated in this way:  P is not Q.  If Q, then not P.  If God is not a man, then if someone is a “man,” he cannot be “God.”   Jesus makes clear reference to two distinct categories in John 3:6 when he says that “the flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.”  Jesus clearly declared God to be “spirit” (John 4:24).  Note that he did not say, “I am spirit,” or “God is flesh.”  By placing “God” in the category of “spirit,” when he himself is clearly a man of flesh and blood, Jesus effectively excluded any possibility that he was God.  If God, being spirit, can incarnate himself as a man, then the clear scriptural distinction between flesh and blood disintegrates. The assertion that Jesus was God in human flesh nullifies the absolute necessity of Christ's obedience, because, as God, no temptation he faced would have been genuine.  That includes if Jesus was only “half” tempted in his “human” nature.  I do not have the benefit of a “divine” side and a “human” side – neither did Jesus.  Because clearly, the divine side would dominate. Another unsolvable problem caused by the “incarnation” is that it destroys the plan that God established of a first Adam and a last Adam.  Romans 5:12-19 clearly defines a critical, logical parallel between Adam and Jesus Christ in the context of the redemption of mankind.  A major consequence of the doctrine that God became man is that it destroys this key parallel, for Adam is hardly comparable to an eternally pre-existent being.  Take a look at this stark contrast between Adam and Jesus: Two Adams Two created beings Two sons of God Two men Two gardens Two temptations Two choices Two attitudes Two decisions Two results Two races Again, food for thought.  More later… Not3in1 Let me make a bold statement here. I believe that to deny Jesus the creator the Glory and honour due his name as One with the Father has done more harm to the body of Christ than any. I will go one step further, If Jesus was just a thought and a plan then why does it say.. “All Things were made by him and for him and without him nothing was made that was made.” You are reinventing the scriptures. For none of the translators over 500 scholars interprets Jn 1:1-3 as you do. So if you dont mind could you show me your credentials as a Hebrew and Greek scholar or some credible evidence that your interpretation is true. Untill then I will believe what is written! Jn 1:1-4 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Hi WorshippingJesus,

You are a wise man.

It is a wise thing to believe what is written.
It becomes our duty study to be sure that it was written by inspiration of God, and not rewritten by man.

Tim

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:54)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,23:15) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:12) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,21:32) Hi W, None. But looking at Acts 10 I have yet to hear you explain this verse. “38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” Did God anoint God with God?? NH The Word/God (the Lord from heaven) who came down from heaven took on likeness of sinful flesh and was born the man Christ Jesus, then he baptised at the Jordan to fulfill all righteousness at which tim the Spirit(third person of the trinity) descended “upon” him and the Father(first person of the trinity)spoke from heaven saying this is my Beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. So you have the Father, Son and Holy Spirit present at his baptism! By the way NH, do you think that Jesus needed to be water baptised? Did he have to repent? It was to fulfill all righteousness. Hi W, Why should God need to be anointed? What did God lack that another person in God had to top God up? Why should a person be used to anoint another person? NH Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death!

Hi W,
So the other person sat on him and this other person was the power here left behind? So was the Spirit not another person in heaven really but the power of Jesus?
Mystery Babylon.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,23:59)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:54) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,23:15) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:12) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,21:32) Hi W, None. But looking at Acts 10 I have yet to hear you explain this verse. “38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” Did God anoint God with God?? NH The Word/God (the Lord from heaven) who came down from heaven took on likeness of sinful flesh and was born the man Christ Jesus, then he baptised at the Jordan to fulfill all righteousness at which tim the Spirit(third person of the trinity) descended “upon” him and the Father(first person of the trinity)spoke from heaven saying this is my Beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. So you have the Father, Son and Holy Spirit present at his baptism! By the way NH, do you think that Jesus needed to be water baptised? Did he have to repent? It was to fulfill all righteousness. Hi W, Why should God need to be anointed? What did God lack that another person in God had to top God up? Why should a person be used to anoint another person? NH Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death! Hi W, So the other person sat on him and this other person was the power here left behind? So was the Spirit not another person in heaven really but the power of Jesus? Mystery Babylon.

NH

Why do you mirepresent me constantly.

I have stated that the Spirit is the third person of the trinity and anointed Jesus with power for his ministry of miracles.

Wjy do you keep harrassing me when I am on your side here as far as the pre-existance of Christ?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,23:29)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 19 2007,23:07) Say, Tim, what is the name of the translation you are referring to from the 1600's? Hi not3in1, In all of these earlier bibles, Tyndale 1525, Tyndale 1534, Matthew's Bible 1537, The Great Bible 1539, The Geneva Bible 1560, the Bishop's Bible (1568) … all had 'it' in John 1:3-4, instead of Him. After the Catholic Rheims NT was printed in 1582 with him in Jn.1:3-4  it appears that the KJV translators followed that trend … placed 'him' in vv. 3-4; starting with the KJV 1611, and thus, the patent misreading continues today. Bless you, Tim

Tim

Could you do me a favour and paste the translations you mention on Jn 1:1-3?

Fo what you said earlier that Jn 1:1 reads…

1. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word.
2.The same was in the beginning with God.
3.All things were made by it; and without it was not anything made that was made

However, the one interpretation I have available is Geneva,

And John 1:1 reads…
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I would apreciate the actual reading of the other translators you mentioned.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,23:57)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:30) Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 19 2007,22:28) I think I have already given my understanding of John 1:1, so I will move on from there to verse 3:  The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way – In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine.  It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made.  Nothing was made outside its scope.  Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us. Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint. Verse 14 we have touched on a bit already, however let me say again that for me, the “Word” is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word “became flesh” as Jesus Christ.  To make John 1:14 support the Trinity, there must first be proof that Jesus existed before he was born and was called “the Word.”  I do not believe that such proof exists.  There is a large body of evidence, however, that Jesus was foreknown by God, and that the “the Word” refers to God's plan or purpose.  I contend that the meaning of the verse is straightforward.  God had a plan (the Word) and that plan became flesh when Jesus was conceived.  Thus, Jesus became “the Word in the flesh.” This does take us back to the subject of pre-existence.  And I would like to make a bold statement here – I believe that this doctrine of pre-existence has done more to weaken the foundation of the rational core of the Christian faith than have all the assaults of so-called “heretics” put together. Some of the reasons why I make this statement are, aside from it's mythological character, the “incarnation” creates other problems; the bible explicitly states that “God is not a man,” (Num. 23:19), which defines two distinct categories, God and man.  In terms of symbolic logic, it could be stated in this way:  P is not Q.  If Q, then not P.  If God is not a man, then if someone is a “man,” he cannot be “God.”   Jesus makes clear reference to two distinct categories in John 3:6 when he says that “the flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.”  Jesus clearly declared God to be “spirit” (John 4:24).  Note that he did not say, “I am spirit,” or “God is flesh.”  By placing “God” in the category of “spirit,” when he himself is clearly a man of flesh and blood, Jesus effectively excluded any possibility that he was God.  If God, being spirit, can incarnate himself as a man, then the clear scriptural distinction between flesh and blood disintegrates. The assertion that Jesus was God in human flesh nullifies the absolute necessity of Christ's obedience, because, as God, no temptation he faced would have been genuine.  That includes if Jesus was only “half” tempted in his “human” nature.  I do not have the benefit of a “divine” side and a “human” side – neither did Jesus.  Because clearly, the divine side would dominate. Another unsolvable problem caused by the “incarnation” is that it destroys the plan that God established of a first Adam and a last Adam.  Romans 5:12-19 clearly defines a critical, logical parallel between Adam and Jesus Christ in the context of the redemption of mankind.  A major consequence of the doctrine that God became man is that it destroys this key parallel, for Adam is hardly comparable to an eternally pre-existent being.  Take a look at this stark contrast between Adam and Jesus: Two Adams Two created beings Two sons of God Two men Two gardens Two temptations Two choices Two attitudes Two decisions Two results Two races Again, food for thought.  More later… Not3in1 Let me make a bold statement here. I believe that to deny Jesus the creator the Glory and honour due his name as One with the Father has done more harm to the body of Christ than any. I will go one step further, If Jesus was just a thought and a plan then why does it say.. “All Things were made by him and for him and without him nothing was made that was made.” You are reinventing the scriptures. For none of the translators over 500 scholars interprets Jn 1:1-3 as you do. So if you dont mind could you show me your credentials as a Hebrew and Greek scholar or some credible evidence that your interpretation is true. Untill then I will believe what is written! Jn 1:1-4 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. Hi WorshippingJesus, You are a wise man. It is a wise thing to believe what is written. It becomes our duty study to be sure that it was written by inspiration of God, and not rewritten by man. Tim

TimothyVI

Shiow me evidence its not! Please!

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:54)

Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death!

Hi w,
Lets look at what you said.
So the Spirit sat on Jesus.
So you do not believe Jesus was filled with that Spirit[Lk 4.1]

Somehow this was related to the return to Jesus of certain powers he had apparently previously had in heaven-do you have scripture for this?

So it was his own power, the powers the Word had when he was with God as another deity you seem to claim?

What did the Spirit have to do with this event-was this other person a conduit for those powers being “returned” or was the Spirit of God given to Jesus and the powers of God Himself came naturally with the Spirit?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 20 2007,00:15)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:54) Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death! Hi w, Lets look at what you said. So the Spirit sat on Jesus. So you do not believe Jesus was filled with that Spirit[Lk 4.1] Somehow this was related to the return to Jesus of certain powers he had apparently previously had in heaven-do you have scripture for this? So it was his own power, the powers the Word had when he was with God as another deity you seem to claim? What did the Spirit have to do with this event-was this other person a conduit for those powers being “returned” or was the Spirit of God given to Jesus and the powers of God Himself came naturally with the Spirit?

NH

You accuse me of inferrence all the time. Take the scripture as it reads.

Does it say he was filled with the Spirit? Show me the scripture please!

It says the Spirit sat upon him!

Now if you want to read into that he was filled then be my guest.

The power that was given him was from the Father, it was the same power that he shared with the Father when he created the worlds.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 20 2007,00:15)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:54) Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death! Hi w, Lets look at what you said. So the Spirit sat on Jesus. So you do not believe Jesus was filled with that Spirit[Lk 4.1] Somehow this was related to the return to Jesus of certain powers he had apparently previously had in heaven-do you have scripture for this? So it was his own power, the powers the Word had when he was with God as another deity you seem to claim? What did the Spirit have to do with this event-was this other person a conduit for those powers being “returned” or was the Spirit of God given to Jesus and the powers of God Himself came naturally with the Spirit?

NH

You have totally disregarded Jn 1:1 and Heb 1:8.

You dont even believe that the Word was deity!

You have no grounds for disregarding these scriptures.

Furthermore I think its hypocritical of you to claim you hold to the scriptures and talk about them being a more sure word of prophecy when you totally ignore certain ones.

You can say the same of me I dont care. But there is one thing for sure I will tell you what I believe concerning any scripture you give me, and we may not agree.

But you will not even give your understanding of these scriptures, but continue to speak falsly of them.

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 20 2007,00:23)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 20 2007,00:15) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:54) Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death! Hi w, Lets look at what you said. So the Spirit sat on Jesus. So you do not believe Jesus was filled with that Spirit[Lk 4.1] Somehow this was related to the return to Jesus of certain powers he had apparently previously had in heaven-do you have scripture for this? So it was his own power, the powers the Word had when he was with God as another deity you seem to claim? What did the Spirit have to do with this event-was this other person a conduit for those powers being “returned” or was the Spirit of God given to Jesus and the powers of God Himself came naturally with the Spirit? NH You accuse me of inferrence all the time. Take the scripture as it reads. Does it say he was filled with the Spirit? Show me the scripture please! It says the Spirit sat upon him! Now if you want to read into that he was filled then be my guest. The power that was given him was from the Father, it was the same power that he shared with the Father when he created the worlds.

Hi W,
So
The trinity god shared power and one person transported this power back to God[Jesus]?
Why did he bother to leave it behind in the first place?

[Not3in1]

WJ – We are all welcome to make as many bold statements concerning our faith as we'd like to. And I agree to disagree with you. Jesus is not the Creator. It was “through” Jesus that everything was made. That is certainly different than saying Jesus is THE Creator. When something is done “through” another person, it is only logical to assume that the person who is being worked “through” is not the originator of the activity; they are means by which the activity is accomplished.

Jesus is one with the Father in the same way that we (you and me) are also one with them BOTH. Jesus prayed for this to happen in John. It was the hope of Jesus that you and I could also experience the same thing that he and his Father experienced, together.

I wish I could say that I am smart enough to reinvent the scriptures, ha; but at last, I am only as smart as you are, WJ. Please don't be bitter and accusatory when others express their thoughts and ideas on scritpure (demanding credentials and so forth). Agreeing to disagree sometimes is the only thing we can do for one another. You are a Trinitarian. I am a Unitarian. It is unlikely that we will change one anothers position. However, we can learn to extend respect and possibly look at scripture through different eyes, however temporary, to possibly see a glimpse of something different.

[Not3in1]

Tim, thank you for the bible translation lesson! I forgot that I knew some of this!

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 20 2007,00:53)

WJ – We are all welcome to make as many bold statements concerning our faith as we'd like to.  And I agree to disagree with you.  Jesus is not the Creator.  It was “through” Jesus that everything was made.  That is certainly different than saying Jesus is THE Creator.  When something is done “through” another person, it is only logical to assume that the person who is being worked “through” is not the originator of the activity; they are means by which the activity is accomplished. Jesus is one with the Father in the same way that we (you and me) are also one with them BOTH.  Jesus prayed for this to happen in John.  It was the hope of Jesus that you and I could also experience the same thing that he and his Father experienced, together. I wish I could say that I am smart enough to reinvent the scriptures, ha; but at last, I am only as smart as you are, WJ.  Please don't be bitter and accusatory when others express their thoughts and ideas on scritpure (demanding credentials and so forth).  Agreeing to disagree sometimes is the only thing we can do for one another.  You are a Trinitarian.  I am a Unitarian.  It is unlikely that we will change one anothers position.  However, we can learn to extend respect and possibly look at scripture through different eyes, however temporary, to possibly see a glimpse of something different.

Not3in1

Well I must be confused as far as what you believe then.

If Jesus did not exist before his birth then how could all things be made “BY” Him?

Heb 1:
8 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.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?

The context of these scriptures shows Jesus as the Creator!

There is no bitterness here. I simply made a bold statement like you my friend!

We can agree to disagree, because it looks like to me we serve a different Jesus.

Consider this, what being but God could contain all that God is?

[NickHassan]

Hi W,
You say
“Consider this, what being but God could contain all that God is? “
So Jesus had to be God for the fullness of deity to reside in him.
So God left heaven and all of God was contained in a roughly 5ft 6' human being?
Why did he tell us to pray to God in heaven then if all of God was in him?
Not much hope of us following God.

[Adam Pastor]

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,23:29)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 19 2007,23:07) Say, Tim, what is the name of the translation you are referring to from the 1600's? Hi not3in1, In all of these earlier bibles, Tyndale 1525, Tyndale 1534, Matthew's Bible 1537, The Great Bible 1539, The Geneva Bible 1560, the Bishop's Bible (1568) … all had 'it' in John 1:3-4, instead of Him. After the Catholic Rheims NT was printed in 1582 with him in Jn.1:3-4  it appears that the KJV translators followed that trend … placed 'him' in vv. 3-4; starting with the KJV 1611, and thus, the patent misreading continues today. Bless you, Tim

Quote

Anyways, here are some examples of the pre-KJV translations that I speak of … Tyndale 1525: http://alleluya.com/TyNT/jn.htm#1:1 In the beginning was that word, and that word was with god: and god was that word. The same was in the beginning with god. All things were made by it, and without it, was made no thing, that made was. In it was life, And life was the light of men, And the light shineth in the darkness, and darkness comprehended it not. Tyndale 1530: http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Scriptures/WTT.htm In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All thinges were made by it, and with out it, was made nothinge, that was made. http://sbible.boom.ru/tyndale.jpg The Great (Cranmer's) Bible (1539-40) “In the begynnynge was the worde, and the worde was wyth God; and God was the worde. The same was in the begynnyng wyth God. All thinges were made by it, and wythout it, was made nothynge that was made. In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyght of men, and the lyght shyneth in darcknes, and the darcknes comprehended it not” (Great Bible, The Byble in Englyshe, that is to saye the Content of al the holy Scrypture, both of the olde, and newe Testament, London: Edward Whitchurche, 1539). Coverdale 1540: http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/scriptures/TCB.htm In the begynnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God, and God was ye worde. The same was in the begynnynge wt God. All thinges were made by the same, and without the same was made nothinge that was made. Geneva 1560: http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Scriptures/TGB.htm In the beginning was the Worde, and the Worde was with God and that Worde was God. The same was in the beginning w God. All things were made by it, & without it was made nothing that was made Bishop's Bible 1568 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was that Word. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by it, and without it, was made nothing that was made. In it was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in the darknesse, and the darknesse comprehendeth it not” (Bishops’ Bible, The Holie Bible, London: Richard Jugge, 1568). Fascinating huh! Did you notice in the first few translations of the Gospel of John, “word” was not capitalized.

Source:
http://adonimessiah.blogspot.com/2007….26.html

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 20 2007,00:55)

Tim, thank you for the bible translation lesson!  I forgot that I knew some of this!

Not3in1

BTW friend!

I didnt “Demand” anything! Neither was I accusatory!

This is what I said…

Quote

So if you dont mind could you show me your credentials as a Hebrew and Greek scholar or some credible evidence that your interpretation is true. Untill then I will believe what is written!

Am I wrong to ask such when you make such claims apposing the translations we currently have of which many gave their lives and even died to bring us what we have?

[NickHassan]

Hi W,
You said
“Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death!”

So Jesus God was deficient in power for a time in fact less than the angels. So can God suffer power deprivation and be less than his lowly creation? Does this not disturb the integrity of being Almighty?

So this God came in his own name and restored his original powers to do his work?
It does not seem to fit with the claims by Jesus that he could do nothing without the Father's help.

Your doctine of trinity is not being well served by your views here.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Adam Pastor @ Mar. 20 2007,01:19)

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,23:29) Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 19 2007,23:07) Say, Tim, what is the name of the translation you are referring to from the 1600's? Hi not3in1, In all of these earlier bibles, Tyndale 1525, Tyndale 1534, Matthew's Bible 1537, The Great Bible 1539, The Geneva Bible 1560, the Bishop's Bible (1568) … all had 'it' in John 1:3-4, instead of Him. After the Catholic Rheims NT was printed in 1582 with him in Jn.1:3-4  it appears that the KJV translators followed that trend … placed 'him' in vv. 3-4; starting with the KJV 1611, and thus, the patent misreading continues today. Bless you, Tim Quote Anyways, here are some examples of the pre-KJV translations that I speak of … Tyndale 1525: http://alleluya.com/TyNT/jn.htm#1:1 In the beginning was that word, and that word was with god: and god was that word. The same was in the beginning with god. All things were made by it, and without it, was made no thing, that made was. In it was life, And life was the light of men, And the light shineth in the darkness, and darkness comprehended it not. Tyndale 1530: http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Scriptures/WTT.htm In the beginnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All thinges were made by it, and with out it, was made nothinge, that was made. http://sbible.boom.ru/tyndale.jpg The Great (Cranmer's) Bible (1539-40) “In the begynnynge was the worde, and the worde was wyth God; and God was the worde. The same was in the begynnyng wyth God. All thinges were made by it, and wythout it, was made nothynge that was made. In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyght of men, and the lyght shyneth in darcknes, and the darcknes comprehended it not” (Great Bible, The Byble in Englyshe, that is to saye the Content of al the holy Scrypture, both of the olde, and newe Testament, London: Edward Whitchurche, 1539). Coverdale 1540: http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/scriptures/TCB.htm In the begynnynge was the worde, and the worde was with God, and God was ye worde. The same was in the begynnynge wt God. All thinges were made by the same, and without the same was made nothinge that was made. Geneva 1560: http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Scriptures/TGB.htm In the beginning was the Worde, and the Worde was with God and that Worde was God. The same was in the beginning w God. All things were made by it, & without it was made nothing that was made Bishop's Bible 1568 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was that Word. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by it, and without it, was made nothing that was made. In it was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in the darknesse, and the darknesse comprehendeth it not” (Bishops’ Bible, The Holie Bible, London: Richard Jugge, 1568). Fascinating huh! Did you notice in the first few translations of the Gospel of John, “word” was not capitalized. Source: http://adonimessiah.blogspot.com/2007….26.html

AP

Not capitalizing the “w” in word does not give your interpretation of it any more validity than capitalising it gives it validity as God!

These translations change nothing.

They all say the “Word was God” or “God was the Word”.

No difference.

So are we supposed to believe if God was the Word then he must have been an it!

Why do men have to reach so far to make the scriptures say something else?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 20 2007,01:31)

Hi W, You said “Jesus was anointed with Power, the Spirit sat upon him, so he could start his ministry of miracles. This Power that he was given was the power that he gave up when he left his place of glory and power with the Father. He humbled himself to the Father and was obedient unto death!” So Jesus God was deficient in power for a time in fact less than the angels. So can God suffer power deprivation and be less than his lowly creation? Does this not disturb the integrity of being Almighty? So this God came in his own name and restored his original powers to do his work? It does not seem to fit with the claims by Jesus that he could do nothing without the Father's help. Your doctine of trinity is not being well served by your views here.

NH

I understand you can not see miracle of incarnation!

[Author]

Posts