- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 24 2013,09:21) Quote (t8 @ Aug. 23 2013,21:21) Oh right. 1+1=1 “If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.”
1 Executive branch + 1 Legislative branch + 1 Judicial branch = 1 Government.It doesn't take a degree in rocket science.
It doesn't take a degree in rocket science to know that God is a HIM and HE and that HE cannot be 3 persons. You fail on this one true point alone.Let's say you have 3 persons in your family. How is your family? Is HE good?
If I said that, you would be confused because in one breath I am talking about multiple persons and then I say, HE.
You would never think to call multiple persons HE and whenever you referred to multiple persons, it would be THEY every single time.
Yet you go against this most basic of understanding to invent three persons as HIM.
You either need a rocket science degree to comprehend this, or it was just not true and is a load of old cobblers. In this case it is clearly the latter.
If you believe that three persons can be HIM, then I wonder if you would be interested in some lotion I have for sale. It knocks 20 years off your life and helps you lose weight even if you do no exercise. If you are interested WJ, please call 1800 GULLIBLE.
Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 23 2013,17:26) That is 1 + 1 = 1
LU, did you know that the word GULLLIBLE is the only word with 3 consecutive letter “l”'s?Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 24 2013,09:31) 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Then God created man (adam/mankind) male and female.Oh yeah there is it. The Trinity.
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 24 2013,16:50) You would never think to call multiple persons HE and whenever you referred to multiple persons, it would be THEY every single time.
Also, did you know that the word “gullible” is not found in any dictionary?
Mike, did you know that the 3 Ls in Gulllible is in fact one L?
1L + 1L + 1L = 1L.Interesting isn't it.
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 24 2013,17:53) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 23 2013,17:26) That is 1 + 1 = 1
LU, did you know that the word GULLLIBLE is the only word with 3 consecutive letter “l”'s?
Your argument is with Jesus. He is the one that said:John 10:30
“I and the Father are one.”
That is 1 + 1 = 1
Not even debatable…yet t8 can't see it.
t8, would you advise Jesus that He and the Father are two?
Do you know better than Jesus, the Lord of Glory?Hey reader, the founder of Heaven Net, t8, is calling our God and Savior, Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:1) who is Jehovah of host (1 Peter 2 & 3) as well as Jehovah our Righteousness (Jeremiah 23:6) “gullible.”
So sad that you are stumbling over Jehovah of hosts, Jesus the Christ. Jehovah's words are fulfilled in you regarding that there will be some who stumble over Jehovah of hosts who Peter identifies as Jesus in 1 Peter 2 and 3.
Proverbs 17:28
Even a fool, when he keeps silent, is considered wise; When he closes his lips, he is considered prudent.Jesus will not be mocked, t8…best you keep a silent keyboard regarding your opinion. Stick to maintaining the board if you must, you are pretty good at that.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 18 2013,02:38) Thanks for posting that, t8. I'm sure much of it sounds familiar by now. The thing to really remember is that the Coptic language, like English, uses an indefinite article. It is the first language into which the NT was translated that does so.
And that means that the first chance anyone ever got at translating John 1:1c as “a god”……….. THEY DID IT!
That is important to remember.
(I do wonder why you had to add a “disclaimer” to make sure no one thought you were trying to “prove the NWT”.
I don't agree with every interpretation of scripture that the JWs have, but the NWT is a fine and accurate translation of the scriptures. If you want to challenge the JWs on some of their beliefs, then do that. But why would you fault the NWT? Do you fault the KJV, NASB, NRSV, or the NIV based solely on the fact that Trinitarians and Catholics use them?)
Exactly what I would have said: the first language that had the indefinite article in it, USED IT AT John 1:1.Not just that. These people were essentially using a the greek alphabet, but slightly modified version of that alphabet, and they translated this at a time that the Ancient Greek was still spoken.
T8 had to put the disclaimers in to keep the conversation on track and cut down slightly on the ad hominems.
The only real argument against the Coptic is that it has some errors in it. Those that argue against it will say it is littered with errors.
So, was this “a god” one of those errors? Even though it had errors, it didn't have errors in every verse. It had errors but not tens of thousands errors.
Going just with the math, it's quite unlikely that this isn't an error.
And that being said, again, the fact that the very first language capable of translating the bible with indefinite articles chose to put one at John 1:1.
And again, not just that, but these people understood Ancient Greek.
They used and modified the Ancient Greek letters to fit their own language.
Because of this, it seems they were in a very unique situation. They both would have understood Ancient Greek and they had the option of including an indefinite article in John 1:1.And they did.
I'm uncertain why this isn't spoken of more when discussing John 1:1
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 19 2013,21:53) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 20 2013,00:50) “disrepute?” – more name-calling huh? I see you are still
attempting to argue over a misconception.
Here is what I actually said:
Ed J. Name calling is when you call people names. It is not when you say a person did a silly thing or put himself into disrepute.
Didn't Jesus call people “offspring of vipers” and such?If Jesus did it…
Ed, I'm not saying you are deluded, but just using it as an example. Lets imagine you were deluded. Would it be wrong to say so? Ah, how would we know. I guess we would have to do tests. Everyone takes the short cut and decides that since “my thinking is right, (choice blindness) you must be deluded or delusional.”
I do understand that ad hominems, while effective at swaying people, aren't logical, but what if they are true? I mean, there are delusional people in the world, many of them religious. What if someone calls a deluded person “deluded”? Would that be wrong?
Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 20 2013,01:47) Back to the topic. What the translators of the Coptic did has no bearing on what John 1:1 says in the Greek.
That is like you posting the N.W.T. and claim that it proves your point; clearly it doesn't!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Yes, of course it has no bearing on what was said in Greek.It does help us to understand what was most likely meant, in the Greek though.
We don't live at a time when koine Greek was spoken. Languages change over time. Just look a few hundred years back at the KJV!
Given that, it's helpful to see how people who lived really close to that time understood it.
Today, English of course has an indefinite article. Greek didn't. But guess what did?–Coptic, which was Egyptian essentially written with a Greek like alphabet, AT A TIME that koine Greek was till spoken.
You have to see some significance to this.
Of course the translation is just a translation and could be in error, BUT IF ANYONE IN THE LAST COUPLE THOUSAND YEARS, WERE IN A POSITION TO KNOW, how it was originally understood, they would.
How all trinity threads work on this board:
Page 1. Discuss actual specific topic
Page 2-infinity. Free for all.Quote (david @ Aug. 27 2013,08:24) How all trinity threads work on this board: Page 1. Discuss actual specific topic
Page 2-infinity. Free for all.
Hi David!Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 27 2013,08:59) Your argument is with Jesus. He is the one that said: John 10:30
“I and the Father are one.”
That is 1 + 1 = 1
Oh brother. How many times LU.He also said that we can be one with them too.
So that is 1+1+1=1
And if you count each person as 1, then 1+1…….
Admit it. This particular argument doesn't stand the test of scrutiny and yet you come back to it time and time again. Only a brainwashed person can overlook this elephant.
If you rely on evidence that has already been put into disrepute, then what does that say about your understanding in this matter?
Please something new or nothing.
Quote (david @ Aug. 27 2013,11:24) How all trinity threads work on this board: Page 1. Discuss actual specific topic
Page 2-infinity. Free for all.
Let's face it. It is pretty much the central theme of the forum, so it usually comes back down to it and I have come to accept the flow of things rather than fight it.Interestingly enough, the Trinity is the foundation for many false religions and Christian denominations.
So those with a vested interest in it will not go down without a fight.
Satan is losing his grip on this deception and people are starting to wake up. I pray that more eyes will be opened. I pray that all those who truly love God, his son, and the truth will see this doctrine for what it is.
And of those whose hearts are not right, it is okay that God allows deception to befall them.
Quote (david @ Aug. 27 2013,11:11) Ed, I'm not saying you are deluded, but just using it as an example. Lets imagine you were deluded
My imagination is working very well for some reason.Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 27 2013,08:59) Jesus will not be mocked, t8.
You said it.He is the son of God and the Christ.
And upon that rock he built his Church of which I wholeheartedly believe in the truth that he built his body on.I know that there are many with the Trinity as the rock, but what Church has the Binity as the rock?
These are of course other Churches, but it is better to belong to the Church that is called 'The Body of Christ'.
When you accept that Jesus is the SON OF GOD and the messiah, then you will be on the unmovable foundation of which the Gates of Hell will never prevail.
Any other rock, and the Gates of Hell will prevail.
Your choice.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
